lindagreenrobo signer
TRANSCRIPT
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 1/26
1
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Timothy L. McCandless, Esq. SBN 147715LAW OFFICES OF TIMOTHY L. MCCANDLESS1881 Business Center Drive, Ste. 9ASan Bernardino, CA 92392Tel: 909/890-9192Fax: 909/382-9956
Attorney for Plaintiffs
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF ____________
___________________________________,
And ROES 1 through 5,000,
Plaintiff ,
v.
SAND CANYON CORPORATION f/k/aOPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION;AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SERVICES,INC.; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., as Trusteefor SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-
OPT2; DOCX, LLC; and PREMIER TRUSTDEED SERVICES and all persons unknownclaiming any legal or equitable right, title, estate,lien, or interest in the property described in thecomplaint adverse to Plaintiff¶s title, or any cloudon Plaintiff¶s title thereto, Does 1 through 10,Inclusive,
Defendants.
CASE NO:
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINTFOR QUIET TITLE, DECLARATORYRELIEF, TEMPORARY RESTRAININGORDER, PRELIMINARY INJUNTIONAND PERMANENT INJUNCTION,CANCELATION OF INSTRUMENTAND FOR DAMAGES ARISINGFROM:
SLANDER OF TITLE; TORTUOUSVIOLATION OF STATUTE [Penal
Code § 470(b) ± (d); NOTARY FRAUD;
///
///
///
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 2/26
2
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
///
Plaintiffs ___________________________ allege herein as follows:
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
1. Plaintiffs ___________ (hereinafter individually and collectively referred to as
³___________´), were and at all times herein mentioned are, residents of the County of
_________, State of California and the lawful owner of a parcel of real property commonly
known as: _________________, California _______ and the legal description is:
Parcel No. 1:
A.P.N. No. _________ (hereinafter ³Subject Property´).
2. At all times herein mentioned, SAND CANYON CORPORATION f/k/a OPTION
ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION (hereinafter SAND CANYON´), is and was, a corporation
existing by virtue of the laws of the State of California and claims an interest adverse to the right,
title and interests of Plaintiff in the Subject Property.
3. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE
SERVICES, INC. (hereinafter ³AMERICAN´), is and was, a corporation existing by virtue of
the laws of the State of Delaware, and at all times herein mentioned was conducting ongoing
business in the State of California.
4. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., as
Trustee for SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2 (hereinafter referred to as
³WELLS FARGO´), is and was, a member of the National Banking Association and makes an
adverse claim to the Plaintiff MADRIDS¶ right, title and interest in the Subject Property.
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 3/26
3
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant DOCX, L.L.C. (hereinafter ³DOCX´),
is and was, a limited liability company existing by virtue of the laws of the State of Georgia, and
a subsidiary of Lender Processing Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation.
6. At all times herein mentioned, __________________, was a company existing by
virtue of its relationship as a subsidiary of __________________.
7. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants sued herein
as DOES I through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defendants by such fictitious names
and all persons unknown claiming any legal or equitable right, title, estate, lien, or interest in the
property described in the complaint adverse to Plaintiffs¶ title, or any cloud on Plaintiffs¶ title
thereto. Plaintiffs will amend this complaint as required to allege said Doe Defendants¶ true
names and capacities when such have been fully ascertained. Plaintiffs further allege that
Plaintiffs designated as ROES 1 through 5,000, are Plaintiffs who share a commonality with the
same Defendants, and as the Plaintiffs listed herein.
8. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times herein
mentioned, Defendants, and each of them, were the agent and employee of each of the remaining
Defendants.
9. Plaintiffs allege that each and every defendants, and each of them, allege herein
ratified the conduct of each and every other Defendant.
10. Plaintiffs allege that at all times said Defendants, and each of them, were acting
within the purpose and scope of such agency and employment.
11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that circa July 2004,
DOCX was formed with the specific intent of manufacturing fraudulent documents in order
create the false impression that various entities obtained valid, recordable interests in real
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 4/26
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 5/26
5
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that Option One
Mortgage sold interest in the aforementioned DEED to unknown parties as a derivative security,
who then repeatedly resold their respective interests, if any, in said DEED on at least six
different occasions.
17. Plaintiffs allege that pursuant to California Civil Code section 2932.5, an assignee
may effectuate the power of sale provided the assignment is properly acknowledged and
recorded. Plaintiffs further allege that due to acts and/or omissions of Defendants, and each of
them, that none of the named Defendants herein are holders in due course and do not maintain an
interest in the Subject Property, including but, not limited to: there are no lawful records
connecting Defendants to this property other that Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One
Mortgage Corporation, and the interest of Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage
Corporation was long ago sold-off to unrelated third parties for which there is no proper ³paper
trail´ to establish the true holder in due course. Plaintiffs allege that as will be seen hereinafter
that Defendants, and each of them, resorted to forged instruments in an attempt to create the
appearance that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Trustee of the Soundview Home Loan
Trust 2007-OPT2.
18. Plaintiffs allege that due to certain acts and/or omissions once the DEED was
³assigned´ to various parties the DEED was detrimentally affected in a number ways, including
but, not limited to: that the power of sale inherent in the DEED was severed, because the
subsequent parties were no longer holders in due course as a matter of law.
19. On April 3, 2011, on the national program ³60 Minutes´, two former employees
of DOCX made admissions which entirely support the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 12 and
13, herein. During said program, former employee, Chris Pendley [sic] stated that he personally
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 6/26
6
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
drafted the name of ³Linda Green´ on thousands and thousands of assignments, although he was
not Linda Green, that he was signing in excess of 2,500 documents per day, and that he was paid
the sum of ten ($10.00) per hour to forge the name of ³Linda Green´ and that he made no
inspection of any documents to determine whether the execution of the assignment was lawful,
had no training to make an inspection of documents to determine if the assignment was lawful,
and was told by his superiors that his execution of the name Linda Green was lawful.
20. On April 3, 2011, Linda Green, a former employee of DOCX, appeared on the
aforementioned ³60 Minutes´ program and stated that she worked in the mailroom of DOCX and
eventually signed some documents, that although she was listed as a vice president of several
companies, that she had no connection with those companies, and that she was aware that her
signature was being used by several other persons on assignments because her name was short
and easy to spell.
21. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that Linda Green, acting
in her capacity as an employee of DOCX allowed her name to forged upon literally thousands of
purported assignments, although Linda Green never executed those assignments, never inspected
those assignments, and that DOCX simply listed that Linda Green was a vice president at various
Banks and lending institutions, however, Linda Green was not lawfully a vice president, and the
assertion that Linda Green was a vice president was an artifice. Plaintiffs further allege that
Linda Green¶s name fraudulent appeared on documents for the following institutions: 11-11-
2004 & 06-22-2006 Vice President, Loan Documentation, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., successor by
merger to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc.; 08-11-2008 & 08-14-2008 Vice President,
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage
Acceptance, Inc.; 08-27-2008 Vice President, American Home Mortgage Servicing as successor-
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 7/26
7
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation; 09-19-2008 Vice President, Mortgage
Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 09-30-2008;
Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 09-30-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 10-08-2009 Vice President & Asst.
Secretary, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Ameriquest Mortgage
Corporation; 10-16-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as
nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 10-17-2008, 11-20-2008
Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American
Brokers Conduit; 11-20-2008 Vice President, Option One Mortgage Corporation; 12-08-2008
Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American
Brokers Conduit; 12-15-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as
nominee for HLB Mortgage; 12-24-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 12-26-2008 Vice
President, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.; 01-13-2009 Vice President, Mortgage
Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for Family Lending Services, Inc.; 01-15-2009
Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for
American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 02-03-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic
Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 02-05-2009 Vice
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for
American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 02-24-2009 Vice President, American Home
Mortgage Servicing, Inc. as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation;
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 8/26
8
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
02-25-2009 Vice President, Bank of America, N.A.; 02-27-2009 Vice President, American
Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation;
03-02-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as
nominee for American Home Mortgage; 03-04-2009 Vice President, Argent Mortgage Company,
LLC by Citi Residential Lending Inc., attorney-in-fact; 03-06-2009 & 03-20-2009 Vice
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 04-15-2009, 04-17-2009, 04-20-2009 Vice President, Bank of
America, N.A.; 05-11-2009, 07-06-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 07-14-2009 Vice
President, Bank of America, N.A.; 07-15-2009 Vice President & Asst. Secretary, American
Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as
trustee for, Ameriquest Mortgage Securities, Inc. asset-backed pass through certificates, series
2004-R7, under the pooling and servicing agreement dated July 1, 2004; 07-30-2009 Vice
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 08-12-2009 Vice President, Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option
One Mortgage Corporation; 08-28-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 09-03-2009
Asst. Vice President, Sand Canyon Corporation formerly known as Option One Mortgage
Corporation; 09-03-2009 Asst. Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting
solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage; 09-04-2009 Asst. Secretary, Mortgage
Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage;
09-08-2009 Vice President, Bank of America, N.A.; 09-21-2009 & 09-22-2009 Vice President,
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 9/26
9
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Acceptance, Inc. Plaintiffs further allege that Linda Green was never lawfully the vice president
of any entity, more particularly the foregoing listed entities.
22. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that Defendant DOCX
was a continuing criminal enterprise whose sole function was to create and forge fraudulent
assignments which would purport to convey interests in real property and the entities listed in
Paragraph 21 hereinabove, were complicate in Defendants¶ fraud.
23. Plaintiffs are informed and believe from beginning circa 2007 and continuing
until sometime in 2010, DOCX produced thousands upon thousands of false and fraudulent
assignments which were recorded in the Offices of the County Recorders of the State of
California, and several other States in the United States of America as well.
24. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that during the ³60
Minutes´ program on April 3, 2011, another former DOCX employee, Savonna Krite [sic] acted
as a notary public and notarized that the signatures of Linda Green and others, were valid,
however, she admitted that the notarizations were not that of Linda Green. Savonna Krite [sic]
further admitted that she was told by officers of DOCX that it was ³alright´ for her to notarize
signatures as being valid. Savonna Krite [sic] also admitted as of the program that she now
understands that her notarizations of said assignments were ³not alright.´
25. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that because the entire
company structure of DOCX was to manufacture forged assignments by the thousands per day,
without any consideration whatsoever that the information contained on those assignments was
valid, and that the notarizations were in fact fraudulent, that no reasonable expectation can be
made that any of the assignments executed by DOCX employees were or are valid.
26. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that circa _______,
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 10/26
10
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendants, and each of them, utilized the services of DOCX in order to manufacture a
fraudulent assignment from Defendant AMERICAN to WELLS FARGO, because WELLS
FARGO could not find documents which would demonstrate that it owned an interest in the
Plaintiffs¶ subject property.
27. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that WELLS FARGO
never had a lawful interest in the Plaintiffs¶ subject property, either in its own capacity or as that
as Trustee for the SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2.
28. Plaintiffs allege that they fully tendered all mortgage payments which were
lawfully due under the DEED, and that they are not in default of their payments, having lawfully
tendered all amounts due and owing.
29. Plaintiffs allege that WELLS FARGO made demands for payment as against the
DEED, however, Plaintiffs allege that WELLS FARGO was not a lawful holder in due course,
that SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2 was not a lawful holder in due course,
and that neither party had any lawful right, title and interest in the DEED.
30. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about,
_______________, Defendant DOCX at the request of Defendants, and each of them, forged an
instrument (hereinafter ³FORGED ASSIGNMENT´) with the name ³Linda Green´ which was
notarized by
³Ellis Simmons.´
31. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about,
_______________, an unknown employee of DOCX, in the course and scope of their
employment, signed the name ³Linda Green´ and that such document had a notary stamp placed
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 11/26
11
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
upon the FORGED ASSIGNMENT which purported to be lawfully notarized by ³Ellis
Simmons.´
32. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that the FORGED
ASSIGNMENT was then sent by DOCX through the United States Postal Service or transmitted
by facsimile over the telephone and telegraph wires of the United States of America to
Defendants, and each of them, in order that such FORGED ASSIGNMENT would be recorded
in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of _______________.
32. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about
_______________, that Defendants, and each of them, their employees and/or agents, caused the
FORGED ASSIGNMENT which unlawfully affected Plaintiffs¶ subject property to be recorded
in the Office of the Country Recorder of the County of _______________ as Instrument No.
_______________. A true and correct copy of the assignment set forth in Paragraphs 30 ± 31, is
attached hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference.
33. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that the sole claim of
Defendants, and each of them, as to their right, title and/or interest in the Plaintiffs¶ Subject
Property is the FORGED ASSIGNMENT.
34. Plaintiffs allege that the FORGED ASSIGNMENT as a matter of law is void and
that it did not constitute a conveyance of an interest to Defendants, or to anyone at all, and that
the FORGED ASSIGNMENT is a legal nullity.
35. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, and each of them, are presently relying upon the
FORGED ASSIGNMENT and are knowingly and intentionally prosecuting a non-judicial
foreclosure based solely upon the recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, necessitating the
instant action.
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 12/26
12
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Slander of Title As Against All Defendants)
36. Plaintiffs incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General Allegations as
though such have been fully set forth herein.
37. Plaintiffs allege that on or about, _______________, Defendants, and each of
them, in some measure actively, directly, indirectly, openly and secretly contributed to the
preparation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT and the recordation of said Instrument in the
Official Records of the Office of the County Recorder of _______________ County.
38. Plaintiffs allege that the recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, by
Defendants and each of them, rendered Plaintiffs¶ title to the Subject Property as unmarketable.
39. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, and each of them, recorded the FORGED
ASSIGNMENT without privilege, knowledge and/or consent of Plaintiffs, the information
contained in said FORGED ASSIGNMENT is false in that no lawful conveyance ever existed
between the parties thereto, and said FORGED ASSIGNMENT when recorded published the
information therein which disparaged Plaintiffs¶ title as would lead a reasonable man to falsely
assume that Defendants, and each of them, in some measure actually maintained some right, title
and interest in Plaintiffs¶ Subject Property, whereas, some of the information contained in the
FORGED ASSIGNMENT is false. A true and correct copy of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT is
attached hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference.
40. Plaintiffs allege that they actually and proximately suffered damages due to the
planning, preparation and recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT in an amount the totality
of which has not been fully ascertained, but in no event less than the jurisdictional limitations of
this court.
41. Plaintiffs allege that the slander of the Subject Properties title was intentional,
fraudulent, malicious, oppressive and burdensome and deserving the imposition of punitive
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 13/26
13
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
damages in an amount sufficient that such conduct will not be repeated.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Tortuous Violation of Statute Penal Code §§ 470(b), 470(d)
As Against Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation;
American Home Mortgage Services, Inc.; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee
for Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2; DOCX, LLC)
42. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General
Allegations and Paragraphs 36 through 41 of the First Cause of Action as though such have been
fully set forth herein.
43. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that circa July 2004,
Defendants, and each of them, contrived a scheme to replace missing documents which
purported to assert interests in real properties through-out the United States of America.
44. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that by August 2008,
Defendants, and each of them, had in some measure participated in the request for production of
forged instruments from DOCX, as well as other document forgery mills, the purpose of which
was to effect title to real properties through-out the United States of America.
45. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about, August
8, 2008, the agents and/or employees of Defendants and each of them, knowingly and
intentionally with the intent to defraud Plaintiffs¶ interest in the Subject Property, prepared the
FORGED ASSIGNMENT and caused said FORGED ASSIGNMENT to be recorded in the
Official Records of the Office of the Recorder of the County of _______________ as Instrument
No. _______________. A true and correct copy of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, is attached
hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference.
46. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, and each of them, tortuously forged the
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 14/26
14
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
signature of Linda Green, on the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, with the intent to defraud Plaintiffs,
and such forgery directly affected Plaintiffs¶ interest in the Subject Property in tortuous violation
of California Penal Code sections 470(b) and 470(d).
47. Plaintiffs allege that they actually and proximately suffered damages due to the
planning, preparation and recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT in an amount the totality
of which has not been fully ascertained, but in no event less than the jurisdictional limitations of
this court.
48. Plaintiffs allege that the tortuous violation of Penal Code sections 470(b) and
470(d), by and through the preparation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, and subsequent
recordation thereof was in willful disregard for Plaintiffs¶ right, title and interest in the Subject
Property, intentional, fraudulent, malicious, oppressive and burdensome and deserving the
imposition of punitive damages in an amount sufficient that such conduct will not be repeated.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Notary Fraud As Against DOCX, LLC and Defendants 1 through 10, Inclusive)
49. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General
Allegations, Paragraphs 35 through 41 and Paragraphs 42 through 48 of the First and Second
Causes of Action as though such have been fully set forth herein.
50. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that circa July 2004,
Defendants, and each of them, contrived a scheme to replace missing documents which
purported to assert interests in real properties through-out the United States of America.
51. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that by August 2008,
Defendants, and each of them, had in some measure participated in the request for production of
forged instruments from DOCX, as well as other document forgery mills, the purpose of which
was to effect title to real properties through-out the United States of America.
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 15/26
15
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
52. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about,
_____________, the agents and/or employees of Defendants and each of them, knowingly and
intentionally with the intent to defraud Plaintiffs¶ interest in the Subject Property, prepared the
FORGED ASSIGNMENT and caused said FORGED ASSIGNMENT to be recorded in the
Official Records of the Office of the Recorder of the County of _______________ as Instrument
No. _______________. A true and correct copy of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, is attached
hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference.
53. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that the FORGED
ASSIGNMENT contained knowingly false statements including, but not limited to: that Wells
Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2, that Linda Green
was a vice president of American Home Mortgage Services, Inc., and that Ellis Simmons
lawfully notarized the FORGED ASSIGNMENT.
54. Plaintiffs allege that they actually and proximately suffered damages due to the
planning, preparation and recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT in an amount the totality
of which has not been fully ascertained, but in no event less than the jurisdictional limitations of
this court.
55. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, and each of them, committed notary fraud by
and through the preparation and notarization of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, and subsequent
recordation thereof was in willful disregard for Plaintiffs¶ right, title and interest in the Subject
Property, intentional, fraudulent, malicious, oppressive and burdensome and deserving the
imposition of punitive damages in an amount sufficient that such conduct will not be repeated.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Cancellation of Instrument As Against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Trustee for
Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2 and Defendants 1 through 10, Inclusive)
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 16/26
16
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
56. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General
Allegations, Paragraphs 35 through 41 and Paragraphs 42 through 48 and Paragraphs 49
through 55 of the First, Second and Third Causes of Action as though such have been fully set
forth herein.
57. Plaintiffs allege that a FORGED ASSIGNMENT was recorded in the Official
Records of the Office of the County Recorder for the County of _______________ as Instrument
No. _______________.
58. Plaintiffs seek an Order of the above-entitled court cancelling Instrument No.
_______________, in as much as said document contains false information and affects
Plaintiffs¶ right, title and interest in the Subject Property.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Quiet Title As Against All Defendants)
59. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General
Allegations, Paragraphs 35 through 41 and Paragraphs 42 through 48 and Paragraphs 49 through
55 of the First, Second and Third Causes of Action as though such have been fully set forth
herein.
60. For all the facts alleged herein, Plaintiffs seek an Order quieting title as of
_______________.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Declaratory Relief As Against All Defendants)
61. An actual controversy has arisen.
62. The parties desire a judicial determine that they may ascertain their respective
right, title and interest in the Subject Property.
63. A judicial determination is necessary that the parties may right, title and interest
in the Subject Property.
64. Plaintiffs allege that as a regular and ongoing part of the business of Defendant
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 17/26
17
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DOCX was to have persons sitting around a table signing names as quickly as possible, so that
each person executing documents would sign approximately 2,500 documents per day. Although
the persons signing the documents claimed to be a vice president of a particular bank of that
document, in fact, the party signing the name was not the person named on the document, as
such the signature was a forgery, that the name of the person claiming to be a vice president of a
particular financial institution was not a ³vice president´, did not have any prior training in
finance, never worked for the company they allegedly purported to be a vice president of, and
were alleged to be a vice president simultaneously with as many as twenty different banks and/or
lending institutions, that the actual signatories of the instruments set forth in Paragraph 12 herein,
were intended to and were fraudulently notarized by a variety of notaries in the offices of DOCX
in Alpharetta, Georgia, that for all purposes the intent of Defendant DOCX was to intentionally
create fraudulent documents, with forged signatures, so that said documents could be recorded in
the Offices of County Recorders through the United States of America, knowing that such
documents would forgeries, contained false information, and that the recordation of such
documents would affect an interest in real property in violation of law, that on or about, May 7,
2007, that they conveyed a first deed of trust (hereinafter ³DEED´) in favor of Option One
Mortgage, Inc. with an interest of approximately $815,000, that Option One Mortgage sold
interest in the aforementioned DEED to unknown parties as a derivative security, who then
repeatedly resold their respective interests, if any, in said DEED on at least six different
occasions, that pursuant to California Civil Code section 2932.5, an assignee may effectuate the
power of sale provided the assignment is properly acknowledged and recorded. Plaintiffs further
allege that due to acts and/or omissions of Defendants, and each of them, that none of the named
Defendants herein are holders in due course and do not maintain an interest in the Subject
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 18/26
18
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Property, including but, not limited to: there are no lawful records connecting Defendants to this
property other that Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation, and the
interest of Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation was long ago sold-
off to unrelated third parties for which there is no proper ³paper trail´ to establish the true holder
in due course. Plaintiffs allege that as will be seen hereinafter that Defendants, and each of them,
resorted to forged instruments in an attempt to create the appearance that Defendant Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. as Trustee of the Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2, that due to certain acts
and/or omissions once the DEED was ³assigned´ to various parties the DEED was detrimentally
affected in a number ways, including but, not limited to: that the power of sale inherent in the
DEED was severed, because the subsequent parties were no longer holders in due course as a
matter of law, that on April 3, 2011, on the national program ³60 Minutes´, two former
employees of DOCX made admissions which entirely support the allegations set forth in
Paragraphs 12 and 13, herein. During said program, former employee, Chris Pendley [sic] stated
that he personally drafted the name of ³Linda Green´ on thousands and thousands of
assignments, although he was not Linda Green, that he was signing in excess of 2,500 documents
per day, and that he was paid the sum of ten ($10.00) per hour to forge the name of ³Linda
Green´ and that he made no inspection of any documents to determine whether the execution of
the assignment was lawful, had no training to make an inspection of documents to determine if
the assignment was lawful, and was told by his superiors that his execution of the name Linda
Green was lawful, on April 3, 2011, Linda Green, a former employee of DOCX, appeared on the
aforementioned ³60 Minutes´ program and stated that she worked in the mailroom of DOCX and
eventually signed some documents, that although she was listed as a vice president of several
companies, that she had no connection with those companies, and that she was aware that her
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 19/26
19
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
signature was being used by several other persons on assignments because her name was short
and easy to spell, that Linda Green, acting in her capacity as an employee of DOCX allowed her
name to forged upon literally thousands of purported assignments, although Linda Green never
executed those assignments, never inspected those assignments, and that DOCX simply listed
that Linda Green was a vice president at various Banks and lending institutions, however, Linda
Green was not lawfully a vice president, and the assertion that Linda Green was a vice president
was an artifice. Plaintiffs further allege that Linda Green¶s name fraudulent appeared on
documents for the following institutions: 11-11-2004 & 06-22-2006 Vice President, Loan
Documentation, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., successor by merger to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage,
Inc.; 08-11-2008 & 08-14-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.,
as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 08-27-2008 Vice President,
American Home Mortgage Servicing as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage
Corporation; 09-19-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as
nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 09-30-2008; Vice President, Mortgage Electronic
Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 09-30-
2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American
Brokers Conduit; 10-08-2009 Vice President & Asst. Secretary, American Home Mortgage
Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Ameriquest Mortgage Corporation; 10-16-2008 Vice President,
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage
Acceptance, Inc.; 10-17-2008, 11-20-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 11-20-2008 Vice President, Option
One Mortgage Corporation; 12-08-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 12-15-2008 Vice President, Mortgage
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 20/26
20
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for HLB Mortgage; 12-24-2008 Vice
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 12-26-2008 Vice President, American Home Mortgage Servicing,
Inc.; 01-13-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for
Family Lending Services, Inc.; 01-15-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 02-03-
2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American
Brokers Conduit; 02-05-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.,
acting solely as nominee for
American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 02-24-2009 Vice President, American Home
Mortgage Servicing, Inc. as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation;
02-25-2009 Vice President, Bank of America, N.A.; 02-27-2009 Vice President, American
Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation;
03-02-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as
nominee for American Home Mortgage; 03-04-2009 Vice President, Argent Mortgage Company,
LLC by Citi Residential Lending Inc., attorney-in-fact; 03-06-2009 & 03-20-2009 Vice
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 04-15-2009, 04-17-2009, 04-20-2009 Vice President, Bank of
America, N.A.; 05-11-2009, 07-06-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 07-14-2009 Vice
President, Bank of America, N.A.; 07-15-2009 Vice President & Asst. Secretary, American
Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as
trustee for, Ameriquest Mortgage Securities, Inc. asset-backed pass through certificates, series
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 21/26
21
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2004-R7, under the pooling and servicing agreement dated July 1, 2004; 07-30-2009 Vice
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 08-12-2009 Vice President, Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option
One Mortgage Corporation; 08-28-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 09-03-2009
Asst. Vice President, Sand Canyon Corporation formerly known as Option One Mortgage
Corporation; 09-03-2009 Asst. Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting
solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage; 09-04-2009 Asst. Secretary, Mortgage
Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage;
09-08-2009 Vice President, Bank of America, N.A.; 09-21-2009 & 09-22-2009 Vice President,
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage
Acceptance, Inc. Plaintiffs further allege that Linda Green was never lawfully the vice president
of any entity, more particularly the foregoing listed entities, that Defendant DOCX was a
continuing criminal enterprise whose sole function was to create and forge fraudulent
assignments which would purport to convey interests in real property and the entities listed in
Paragraph 21 hereinabove, were complicate in Defendants¶ fraud, that beginning circa 2007 and
continuing until sometime in 2010, DOCX produced thousands upon thousands of false and
fraudulent assignments which were recorded in the Offices of the County Recorders of the State
of California, and several other States in the United States of America as well, allege that during
the ³60 Minutes´ program on April 3, 2011, another former DOCX employee, Savonna Krite
[sic] acted as a notary public and notarized that the signatures of Linda Green and others, were
valid, however, she admitted that the notarizations were not that of Linda Green. Savonna Krite
[sic] further admitted that she was told by officers of DOCX that it was ³alright´ for her to
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 22/26
22
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
notarize signatures as being valid. Savonna Krite [sic] also admitted as of the program that she
now understands that her notarizations of said assignments were ³not alright,´ that because the
entire company structure of DOCX was to manufacture forged assignments by the thousands per
day, without any consideration whatsoever that the information contained on those assignments
was valid, and that the notarizations were in fact fraudulent, that no reasonable expectation can
be made that any of the assignments executed by DOCX employees were or are valid, that circa
July 2008, Defendants, and each of them, utilized the services of DOCX in order to manufacture
a fraudulent assignment from Defendant AMERICAN to WELLS FARGO, because WELLS
FARGO could not find documents which would demonstrate that it owned an interest in the
Plaintiffs¶ subject property, that WELLS FARGO never had a lawful interest in the Plaintiffs¶
subject property, either in its own capacity or as that as Trustee for the SOUNDVIEW HOME
LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2, that they fully tendered all mortgage payments which were
lawfully due under the DEED, and that they are not in default of their payments, having lawfully
tendered all amounts due and owing, that WELLS FARGO made demands for payment as
against the DEED, however, Plaintiffs allege that WELLS FARGO was not a lawful holder in
due course, that SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2 was not a lawful holder in
due course, and that neither party had any lawful right, title and interest in the DEED, that on or
about, _______________, Defendant DOCX at the request of Defendants, and each of them,
forged an instrument (hereinafter ³FORGED ASSIGNMENT´) with the name ³Linda Green´
which was notarized by ³Ellis Simmons,´ that on or about, _______________, an unknown
employee of DOCX, in the course and scope of their employment, signed the name ³Linda
Green´ and that such document had a notary stamp placed upon the FORGED ASSIGNMENT
which purported to be lawfully notarized by ³Ellis Simmons,´ that the FORGED
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 23/26
23
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ASSIGNMENT was then sent by DOCX through the United States Postal Service or transmitted
by facsimile over the telephone and telegraph wires of the United States of America to
Defendants, and each of them, in order that such FORGED ASSIGNMENT would be recorded
in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of _______________, that on or about
_______________, that Defendants, and each of them, their employees and/or agents, caused the
FORGED ASSIGNMENT which unlawfully affected Plaintiffs¶ subject property to be recorded
in the Office of the Country Recorder of the County of _______________ as Instrument No.
_______________. A true and correct copy of the assignment set forth in Paragraphs 30 ± 31, is
attached hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference, that the sole claim of
Defendants, and each of them, as to their right, title and/or interest in the Plaintiffs¶ Subject
Property is the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, that the FORGED ASSIGNMENT as a matter of law
is void and that it did not constitute a conveyance of an interest to Defendants, or to anyone at
all, and that the FORGED ASSIGNMENT is a legal nullity, that Defendants, and each of them,
are presently relying upon the FORGED ASSIGNMENT and are knowingly and intentionally
prosecuting a non-judicial foreclosure based solely upon the recordation of the FORGED
ASSIGNMENT, necessitating the instant action, and as such, the Defendants set forth herein
have no right, title and interest in the Subject Property, whereas, Defendants contend that all of
their acts and/or omissions were lawful and that Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Trustee of the
Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2.
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Manuel A Madrid and Virginia J. Madrid pray for Judgment as
follows:
FOR THE FIRST AND THIRD CAUSES OF ACTION:
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 24/26
24
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1. For an Order, restraining Defendants, and their agents, employees, officers, attorneys,
and representatives from engaging in or performing any of the following acts: (i) proceeding
with the non-judicial foreclosure without an Order of this court, (ii) offering, or advertising this
property for sale and (ii) attempting to transfer title to this property and or (iii) holding any
auction therefore;
2. For general damages subject to proof at time of trial;
3. For special damages subject to proof at time of trial;
4. For punitive damages subject to proof at time of trial;
5. For costs of suit herein;
6. For reasonable attorney¶s fees provided by contract or statute; and
7. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
FOR THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:
1. For general damages according to proof at time of trial;
2. For special damages according to proof at time of trial;
3. For costs of suit incurred herein;
4. For reasonable attorney¶s fees provided by contract or statute; and
5. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
FOR THE FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
1. For an Order cancelling Instrument No. _______________, which was recorded on
August in the
Office of the Country Recorder of the County of _______________;
2. For costs of suit incurred herein;
3. For reasonable attorney¶s fees as provided by contract or statute; and
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 25/26
25
COMPLAINT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
FOR THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
1. For an Order quieting title to the Subject Property from _______________;
2. For costs of suit incurred herein;
3. For reasonable attorney¶s fees subject to proof at time of trial; and
4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
FOR THE SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
1. For a declaration that Defendants do not have a right, title and interest in the Subject
Property;
2. For costs of suit incurred herein;
3. For reasonable attorney¶s fees subject to proof at time of trial; and
4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
Dated: _______, 2011 LAW OFFICES OF
TIMOTHY L. MCCANDLESS
__________________________________
Timothy L. McCandless, Esq.,Attorney for Plaintiffs
8/7/2019 Lindagreenrobo Signer
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lindagreenrobo-signer 26/26
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
VERIFICATION
I, Timothy L. McCandless am the attorney of record for Plaintiffs in the above-entitled
action. The Plaintiffs are either absent from the County of Los Angeles where my office is
located, or is otherwise unable to verify this complaint, or the facts are within the knowledge of
the undersigned. For this reason, I am making this verification.
I have read the foregoing Complaint and know of its contents. I am informed and believe
the matters therein to be true, and on that ground, allege that the matters stated in it are true. I
declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration
was executed at San Bernardino, California
DATED: __________, 2011
____________________________ Timothy L. McCandless, Esq.