stopa letter to judge levens re motions to dismiss

8/6/2019 Stopa Letter to Judge Levens RE Motions to Dismiss

1/22

STOPA LAW FIRM Mark P. Stopa, Esq.

August 4, 2011Honorable William Levens800 E. Twiggs 8t.Room 502Tampa, FL 33602

RE: Chase Home Finance, LLC v. Herrera;Hillsborough County Case No. 09~CA-13287

Your Honor:

During yesterday's hearing in the above-captioned case, an issue arose regarding theparties' ability to be heard at a duly-noticed hearing. As you'll recall, you noted my strongopinion (not necessarily in this case, but as a general matter in foreclosure lawsuits) that Floridajudges such as yourself should afford parties a fair opportunity to be heard prior to an adverseruling. The conversation was lighthearted, but I trust you know this is an issue I feelpassionately about. In other words, I am, respectfully, concerned about the Court's recentAdministrative Order which authorizes rulings in foreclosure cases ex parte, without a hearing.The purpose of this letter is to convey my candid yet respectful thoughts on the matter.

My office has spent a lot of time over the past few years researching foreclosure-relatedissues, staying abreast of recent developments in this evolving, amorphous area of law. Unlikesome defense attorneys in the industry, we don't file motions to dismiss as a stall tactic, with theintention of withdrawing them on the eve of a hearing. In fact, I loathe that practice, as I fear itcauses judges to think that's what all foreclosure defense attorneys do with motions to dismiss.On the contrary, any motions to dismiss that we file are done with the sincere, good-faith beliefthat these motions are well-taken and should be granted.

I suppose it's easy to say "my motions are well-taken," so let me do more than talk. Inthe year or so that the senior judges were presiding over foreclosure cases in HillsboroughCounty (ending in June, 2011), my office obtained numerous (without counting, I'd say dozens)of Orders granting motions to dismiss. Attached to this letter are samples of some of theseOrders - just from Hillsborough. Lest you think this is an anomaly, let me be clear - I'destimate that we have prevailed on about half of the motions to dismiss that we have broughtover the years. Obviously these results vary depending on the facts of each case and, to someextent, from judge to judge, but 50% is a fair estimate of our success on motions to dismiss overthe years.

TAMPA2202 N. Westshore Blvd.Suite 200Tampa, FL 33607

ORLANDO4700 Millenia Blvd.Suite 175Orlando, FL 32839

JACKSONVILLE10151 Deerwood Park Blvd.Building 200, Suite 25Jacksonville, FL 32256

FORT LAUDERDALE1560 Sawgrass Corporate Pkwy4 L h Floor

Sawgrass, FL 33323Main Number (727) 6673413


2/22

With this backdrop, I have a hard time accepting the fact that the Hillsborough Courtsystem can suddenly change its procedures to essentially eliminate all hearings on such mattersand, contemporaneously, begin denying such motions without a hearing. After all, these aremotions that my office was winning, about half the time, on a regular basis, when we wereafforded hearings. How can we go from that to, suddenly, losing on 100% of these motionswithout a hearing? I'm not trying to suggest that you or any other judge has pre-determined themerits of these motions or anything like that. That said, I hope you can understand my concernabout every motion to dismiss being denied, without a hearing, since this procedural change.

I don't expect to win all of the time, especially in foreclosure cases. Sometimes I get itwrong, sometimes judges get it wrong, etc. And I fully recognize that different judges havedifferent views on the law or how the law should be applied in the foreclosure context. In otherwords, reasonable people can disagree about these issues. That said, to not even give me achance to be heard on these motions feels, respectfully, quite unfair and causes me to harborconcerns about due process. I know my clients feel similarly. Compounding these concerns isthe fact that it seems the Court is only treating foreclosure cases in this manner. To illustrate, Ido Plaintiffs work as well (not in the foreclosure context, but in general litigation matters), andI've never gotten a judge to deny a motion to dismiss without a hearing in one of those files.Honestly, it would never occur to me to even ask. Respectfully, the disparate treatment offoreclosure cases feels unfair.

I realize the Court is inundated with cases, many of which are uncontested. I'm sure that,in many instances, the new procedure is a situation of "no harm, no foul," as there is nobody onthe defense side complaining or even trying to defend the case. However, the AdministrativeOrder makes no distinction between contested and uncontested cases, so even those homeownerswho are actively defending get subjected to these same procedures.

I ask that you please try to view this from a defense/homeowner perspective. Here I am,going from a situation where my motions to dismiss are granted about half the time, with ahearing, to my motions being systematically denied, essentially 100% of the time, without ahearing. Losses happen, I realize. But losses are tough to swallow when you feel like you didn'teven get a chance to be heard. Also, when you compound these losses with the legitimatequestions/concerns shared by many homeowners about bank fraud and robe-signing, difficultquestions arise about the fairness of the judicial process for homeowners/consumers. Atminimum, even if the system actually is fair, there seems to be an appearance of unfairness, onewhich I know the judicial canons strive to eliminate.

I apologize if this sounds like I am unloading on you; that is not my intent. Youindicated yesterday you have "never had a problem with me," and I feel the same about you.This is not a personal issue whatsoever. The only reason this letter is directed to you is becauseyou raised this issue at yesterday's hearing (in which you presided), so I saw this as anopportunity to explain to you why I feel so passionately about this issue.

TAMPA2202 N.Westshore Blvd.Suite 200Tampa, FL 33607

ORLANDO4700 Millenia Blvd.Suite 175Orlando, FL 32839

JACKSONVILLE10151 Deerwood Park Blvd.Building 200, Suite 25Jacksonville. FL 32256

FORT LAUDERDALE1560 Sawgrass Corporate Pkwy

4th FloorSawgrass, FL 33323Main Number (727) 667-3413


3/22

Please take a moment to review the attached Orders. When you do, I hope you'll agreewith my belief that the motions to dismiss my office is filing are at least worthy of a hearing. Atminimum, I hope you'll at least understand where I'm coming from. Respectfully, I'm not somehack filing frivolous motions to dismiss to delay; I'm filing motions to dismiss because I believethey are well-taken and I've prevailed on these motions in many cases. I cannot speak for others,but I have several experienced, respected colleagues in the foreclosure defense arena who feelsimilarly about the merits of their motions.

I am copying Chief Judge Menendez on this letter given that he signed the recentAdministrative Order. To the extent you find it appropriate to share this letter with other judges,I wouldn't object, but that is obviously up to you. At this point, I'm sure most Tampa judgesknow I feel this way, but I suppose it can't hurt for each to understand why I feel this way.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.Respectfull y,STOPA LAW FIRM~~Jf

Enclosurescc: Erin Rowland, Esq.

Chief Judge Menendez

TAMPA2202 N. Westshore Blvd.

Suite 200Tampa, FL 33607

ORLANDO4700 Millenia Blvd.

Suite 175Orlando, FL 32839

JACKSONVILLE10151 Deerwood Park Blvd.

Building 200, Suite 25Jacksonville, FL 32256

FOR T LAUDERDALE1560 Sawgrass Corporate Pkwy

4th FloorSawgrass, FL 33323

Main Number (727) 667-3413


4/22

fN TH E CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TH IRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT[N AND FOR H ILLSBOROUGH COUNTY . FLORIDA

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLOI FKA THEBANK Of NEW YORK. AS TRUSTEE. FOR TH EC ER TIF IC ATES H O LD ER S CWA lT .! C.MOR TG AG E PA SS-TH RO UG H CER TIF IC ATESSERIES 2007-16CB.

PlaintiffC ase N o. 09-30544

v.Division: KBRUCE M . FRANK. et. I I .

Defendants._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1

ORDER GRANT ING M OTION TO DISM ISS COM PLA INT

THIS CAUSE . having come before the COUI1 on August 27, 2010 on the Motion toDismiss Complain! of Defendant. BRUCE M . FRANK . and the COUI1. having reviewed th emotion and being duly advised in the prem ises. it is hereby:

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follow s:1. The motion be and is hereby GRANTED. This case is hereby DISMISSED

without prejudice.2. Plaintiff shall have 20 days in w hich 10 f ile an Amended Complaint. D efendant

shall have 20 days thereafter in w hich to respond.DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa. H illsborough County. F lorida on this

_L da y of' September. 2010. ORIGINAL SIGNEDcc: K atherine T ilka. E sq.Mark P. Stopa. Esq.

C ircuit C ourt Judge DONALD C EVANSS~NIOR CIRCUiT JUDGE


5/22

I N T H E C IR C U I T C O U R T O F T H E T H IR T E E N T H JU D IC IA L C IR C U I TrN AND FOR H ILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. FLORIDA

THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON FKA THEBANK OF NEW YORK. AS TRUSTEE. FOR TH ECERTIFICATES HOLDERS CWAL T. INC..M ORTGAGE PASS-TH ROUGH CERTIFICATESS ER IE S 2 00 7-16 CB .

Plaintiff .Case No. 09-30544

v.Division: KBRUCE M . FRANK . et. al.

Defendants._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1O RDER G RA NT ING M O TIO N T O DISM ISS COM PL AINT

THIS CAUSE . hav ing com e befo re th e Court on A ugust 27, 2010 on the M otion toD ism iss Com plaint of D efendant. BRUCE M. FRANK. and the C ourt. having rev iew ed themotion an d being duly advised in the prem ises. i t is h er eb y ;

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED a s f ollo w s:1. The m otion be and is hereby GRANTED . This case is hereby D ISM ISSE D

w i th o ut p re ju dic e.2. Plainti ff shall have 20 days in which 10 file an Amended Complaint. D efendant

sh all h av e 20 days thereaf ter in w hich to respond.DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa. H illsborough County. Florida on this

_ _ _ l _ day of Septem ber. 2010 .

cc: Kather ine Tilka. Esq .M ark P . S topa. E sq .C ircuit C ourt Judge

ORIGINAL SIGNED

DONALD C EVANSSENIOR CIRCuIT JUDGE


6/22

IN TH E C IRCU IT COURT OF TH E T IIIRTEENTH JU DIC IAL C IRCU ITIN A ND FO R H ILLSBO RO UG H C OU NTY , FLO RID ABAC H OM E LOANS SERV IC ING , LPFKA COUNTRYW IDE H OM EL OA N S SE RV IC IN G LP ,

Plaintiff, Case No. 10016594v.DENNIS M. LASKO, et. al.

Defendants,/- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~

ORDER GRANT ING M OTION TO D ISM ISSTHIS CAUSE , having come before the Court on Aprill, 2011 on Defendant's Motion to

Dismiss, and the Court, having reviewed the motion, heard the argwnents of counsel, and beingduly advised in the premises, it is hereby;

ORDERED AND ADroDGED:1. The motion be and is hereby GRANTED .2. T his case be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice.DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, F-l~ltida-GB-this-----!" ~ R ' '!GIN!l!! C'I'-"I'F'-,.. '- \. q ~rJ:L - : ~ i~t:.'..1

day of April, 2011. ; M 'R i1 2 0 1 1--.: ROGe'", ;:-,'0GE"T SR

- ~. " '; 1 '" "" . - ,r'-:'" '~j...iL1J~_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ . _ . . _ ~ _Circuit Court Judgecc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Glenn Lindsey, Esq.


7/22

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA

BANK OF AMERlCA, N.A.,Plaintiff,

Case No. 10012312v . Division: JCHERYL SERNA, et. al.

Defendants,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISSTHIS CAUSE, having come before the Court on March 11,2011 on Defendants' Motion

to Dismiss, and the Court, having heard the arguments of counsel and being duly advised in thepremises, it is hereby;

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:1. The motion be and is hereby GRANTED. This case is hereby dismissed without

prejudice.2. Plaintiff shall have 60 days in which to r e-f ile , if it so chooses.DONE ANn ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida on this

.,.,.. ~L1-'''--- fORIGINA.L SIGNED I,!.'_--: day of Mareh, 2011. I !I A P R 0 4 2 0 1 1 IC . C J . I PERRY ~ LlTI! E iITCUlt ourt urge SENIOR C i R C U I T JUDGE I

cc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Rick A. Garcia., Esq.


8/22

TN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDADEUTSCHE BANK, NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE, FORCARRINGTON MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST, SERIES 2005-NC3 ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES

Plaintiff,Case No. 10 18049

v.KAREN KRENN and BRIAN KRENN, et. a/.

Defendants,I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

O RDER GRANT ING M OT IO N TO DISM ISS

THIS CAUSE, having come before the Court on March 11,2011 on Defendants' Motionto Dismiss, and the Court, having heard the arguments of counsel and being duly advised in thepremises, it is hereby;

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:1 . The motion be and is hereby GRANTED . This case is hereby dismissed without

prejudice.2. Plaintiff shall have 60 days in which to re- file, if it so chooses.DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida on this

" : " " f '~ - - ' . ~ . ; ~)._~~ day of M a r c h ; 2011. IOR!GINAL SIGNEO-!I A P R 0 4 2 D 1 1 j

Circuit Court fudge PERRY A LITTLE jI SENIOR CIRCUlT JUDGE J

cc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Rick A. Garcia, Esq.


9/22

IN TH E CIRCUIT COURT OF TH E TH IRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUITTN AND FOR H ILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. FLORIDA

BANKUNITED,Plaintiff,

Case No. 10 2041 Iv.JOSE E . R lVERA & D EN ISE R IV ER A, e t. a1.

Defendants,

AGREED ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS

TH IS CAU SE , having come before the Court on Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. and th eCourt having reviewed the motion and being duly advised in the premises. it is hereby;

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:I. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss is granted. The Complaint is dismissed without

prejudice.2. Plaintiff shall have 90 days from the date of this order to file an Amended

Complaint which shall cure all deficiencies that gave rise to dismissal as set forth in the Motion.Defendants shall have 30 days thereafter in which to respond. If Plaintiff fails to amend. [heComplaint is dismissed without further action by the Court.

DONE AND O RD ER ED in Chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida on thisf"'r-/"J.j_ day of February, 2011. ORIGINAL. SIGNED

F E B 1 4 2 0 1 1

cc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Aw i Ida Esteres, Esq.


10/22


11/22

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDAWELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,

Plaintiff,Case No. 10 10515v .Division: HCHRISTOPHER W . MOORE , e t. a t.

Defendants,__________________________________ 1

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

THIS CAUSE, having come before the Court on April 29, 2011 on the Motion to DismissComplaint of Defendants CHRISTOPHER W. MOORE and GRETCHEN L. MOORE, and theCourt, having reviewed the motion and being duly advised in the premises, it is hereby;

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:1. The Motion be and is hereby GRANTED. The Complaint be and is hereby

DISMISSED. Plaintiff shall have 45 days from the date ofthis Order to file a Verified AmendedComplaint in Compliance with Fla. Stat. 92.525 and Fla. Sup. Ct. Order SC09-1460 and SC09-1579. Defendant shall have 45 days thereafter in which to serve a response. If Plaintiff fails totimely amend, the Complaint shall stand as dismissed without further order.

" RONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Hil1sli0ifilj~OjlJliJlo\Floiida on this[ 3 Cffy of May, 2011. ; I \r 1 . : l t~ldr ONA l.[ ) C . E ' MS. L:NIO~CIRntll j JurI. ,I"

DONALD COLLINS EVANSCircuit Court Judge

cc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Ingrid Fadil, Esq.


12/22

IN TH E CIRCUIT COURT OF TH E TH IRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR H ILLSBOROUGH COUNTY , FLORIDA

BANK OF AMER IC A, N .A .,Plaintiff,

Case No. 10 05801v .

Division: FALEXANDER GREGG, et. al.Defendant,________________________________ ~I

O RDER G RA NT ING M O TIO N TO D ISM ISS CO M PL AINT

TH IS CAUSE, having come before the Court on April 29,2011 on the Motion to DismissComplaint of Defendant ALEXANDER GREGG, and the Court, having reviewed the motionand being duly advised in the premises, it is hereby;

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:1. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED for the reasons set forth therein.

This case is hereby DISMISSED. Plaintiff shall have 45 days from the date of this Order to filea Verified Amended Complaint. Defendant shall have 45 days thereafter in which to serve aresponse. If Plaintiff fails to timely amend, the Complaint shall stand as dismissed withoutfurther order.

DONE AND ORDERED in chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida on this__ day of May, 2011. ORIGINAL SIGNED

M A YSANDRATAr LvI(Circuit Court Judge J ROGERS pA.DGEn SR.SENIOR CIRCUIT JUOGEcc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.

Jamie Epstein, Esq.


13/22

[N TH E C IRCU IT COURT O F TH E TH IRTEEN TH JUD IC IAL C IRCU ITIN AN D FOR H ILLSBORO UGH COU NTY , FLO RIDA

U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION ASTRUSTEE,Plaintif f , C ase N o.1 0007484

v .Division: IFR AN CIS L ANDR Y, et. al.

Defendants,________________________________ ~IO RDER GRA NT ING M OT IO N TO DISM ISS CO MPLA INT

TH IS C AU SE , having com e before the C ourt on M ay 13,2011 on the M otion to D ism issC om plaint o f D efendants FR AN CIS L AN DR Y and SH ER YL LA ND RY , and the C ourt, havingrev iew ed the m otion, heard the argum ents o f counsel and being duly advised in the prem ises, it ishereby;

O RD ERED A ND A DJU DGED as fo llow s:1 . The M otion be and is hereby GRANTED . The Com plaint be and is hereby

D ISM ISSE D. P laintif f shall have 60 days to f ile a V erif ied A mended C om plaint in com pliancew i th F la .S ta t. 92 .525 and F la. Sup . C t. O rder SC09-1460 and SC09- J 579. D efendants shallhave 60 days thereaf ter in w hich to serve a response. If P laintif f f ails to tim ely am end, theC om plaint sh all stand as d ism issed w itho ut fu rth er o rd er.

D ON E A ND O RD ERED in Cham bers in Tam pa, H illsborough County, F lo rida on th isday of M ay, 2011 . ORIGINAL SIGN

-D-ON-A-L-D-C-O-L-L-IN-S-E-V-A-N-S--+-- - f l I t IH--0 1 1Circuit Court Judge FRANK A. GOMEZSENIOR C IR CUI T J UOGcc: M ark P . Stopa, E sq .

A lic ia J ac ob s, E sq .


14/22

IN TH E CIRCUIT COURT OF TH E TH IRTEENTH JUD ICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR H ILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA

WELLS FARGO BANK , N .A .,Plaintiff, Case No.1 0-CA-13399

v. Division: KANTONIO F. ORTIZ JR, et. al. Section: II

Defendants,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ /O RD ER G RA NT IN G M O TIO N T O D ISM ISS O R ST RIKE A M EN DED C OM PL AIN T

TH IS C AU SE , having come before the Court on May 13,2011 on th e Motion to Dismissor Strike Amended Complaint of Defendants Antonio F. Ortiz Jr. and Deborah A. Ortiz, and theCourt having reviewed the motion, heard the arguments of counsel and being duly advised in thepremises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Motion be and is hereby GRANTED . Plaintiffs Verified AmendedMortgage Foreclosure Complaint is D ISMISSED . Plaintiff shall have 60 days to from the dateof this Order to file a Verified Second Amended Complaint. Defendants shall have 60 daysthereafter in which to serve a response. If Plaintiff fails to timely amend the Verified AmendedMortgage Foreclosure Complaint shall stand as dismissed without further order.

2. In filing its Verified Amended Complaint Plaintiff shall cure the inconsistencyconcerning the recording date of the mortgage at issue. Plaintiff shall also allege ultimate factsthat se t forth and identify the present owner of the note and mortgage and the present holder ofthe note an d mortgage as Plaintiff sated it is not the present owner of the note and mortgage.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida on this__ day of May, 2011.

DONALD CO LLIN S EV AN SCircuit Court Judge

FRANK A GOMEZSENIOR CIRCL": ~_._jc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Kimberly 1.Newvine, Esq.


15/22


16/22


17/22


WELLS FARGO BANK, NA,Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 10007472TERESA M. LUCARDIE, et. al.Defendant, Division: J__________________________________ 1

O RDER O N DEFENDA NT 'S M OTIO N TO DISM ISS COMPLA INT

THIS CAUSE , having come before th e Court on May 27 , 20 11 on the Motion to DismissComplaint of Defendant TERESA M. LUCARDIE, and the Court, having reviewed the motionand being duly advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Defendant's Motion to Dismiss shall be treated as a Motion for MoreDefinite Statement under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.140(e). Plaintiff fails to plead facts identifying its entitystatus and fails to plead facts as to its standing to sue; thus rendering the Complaintimpermissibly vague and ambiguous and prejudicing the Defendant's ability to properly defend.

2. Defendant's Motion for More Definite Statement is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiffshall have forty-five (45) days from the date of this Order to (1) plead facts identifying itsexistence as a corporation or other legal entity duly organized in a jurisdiction recognized underFlorida law; and (2) plead facts identifying the owner and holder of the Note and Mortgage. IfPlaintiff fails to timely amend the Complaint shall stand as dismissed without further Order.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida on this"t1--"'- OR IG INAL S IGNEe/1 day of June, 2011. J U N 1 7 z u n

DONAW C.EVANSCircuit Court Judge S E N R J R C I R c u n J I :J D e E _ _

cc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Rickisha L. Hightower-Singletary, Esq.


18/22

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR H IL LSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLOR IDA

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.Plaintiff, ,

Case No. 10 24027v.JOHN LONDONO NKIAJOHN L. LONDONO, et. al.

Defendant,- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , /ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS COl\1PLAINT

TH I S CAUSE, having come before the Court on agreement of the parties in lieu of ahearing on the Motion to Dismiss of Defendant JOHN LONDONO AIKIA JOHN L.

LONDONO, and the Court, being duly advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED ANDADJUDGED as follows:

1 . The Motion to Dismiss be and is hereby DENIED as to Defendant's arguments onPlaintiff's capacity to sue, the requirement of a 57.011 cost bond and the requirement to attach apurported notice of default.

2. The Motion to Dismiss be and is hereby GRANTED as to all other arguments asset forth in the motion. The Complaint be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice.Plaintiff shall have sixty (60) days from the date of this Order to file a Verified AmendedComplaint in compliance with Fla. Stat. 95.525. Defendant shall have thirty (30) days thereafterto serve a response. If Plaintiff fails to timely amend, Plaintiff's Complaint shall stand asdismissed without further action.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida on this

cc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Jason A. Bavol, Esq.

1 1Q 15 jCircuit Court Judge S ". NORA TAYLOR iL ~~~i05.~~!.!;!. f?GE !

~-----~-----~-,1 OR,it-:;i?\j ,t ,1 . c ;V~N.!FO j, .!..,.._.If~ ~ ... .._ .......,_ .......... _ jI jI IU N 'J ~ : 1 1 m i,;23

day of June, 2011.


19/22


WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,Plaintiff,

Case No. 10 03669v .SHAUN CARCARY, SHONA CARCARY,SHONA CARCARY NKJA SHONA R. CARCARYAS TRUSTEE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF A TRUSTAGREEMENT DATED 11/13/2006 KNOWN AS TH ETRUST NO. 5032 TRUST, e t. a l.

Defendants,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1ORDER-GRANTING AMENDED MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

THIS CAUSE, having come before the Court on agreement of the parties in lieu of ahearing on the Amended Motion to Dismiss of Defendants SHAUN CARCARY, SHONACARCARY, SHONA CARCARY A/KJA SHONA R. CARCARY AS TRUSTEE UNDER THEPROVISIONS OF A TRUST AGREEMENT DATED 11113/2006 KNOWN AS THE TRUSTNO. 5032 TRUST, and the Court, being duly advised in the premises, it is hereby;

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:1. The Amended Motion to Dismiss be and is hereby DENIED as to Defendants'

arguments on Plaintiff's capacity to sue, the requirement of a 57.011 cost bond and therequirement to attach a purported notice of default.

2. The Amended Motion to Dismiss be and is hereby GRANTED as to all otherarguments as set forth in the motion. The Complaint be and is hereby DISMISSED withoutprejudice.

3. Plaintiff shall have sixty (60) days from the date of this Order to file a VerifiedAmended Complaint in compliance with Fla. Stat. 95.525. Defendants shall have thirty (30)


20/22

days thereafter to serve a response. IfPlaintiff fails to timely amend, Plaintiff's Complaint shallstand as dismissed without further action.

Circu it Cour t JUdgeL-~R CIRCUIT JUDGE !.-1cc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Jason A. BavoI, Esq.

2


21/22

IN TH E CIR CU IT CO UR T O F TH E TH IR TEEN TH JUDICIAL CIRCUITeN AND FOR H IL LSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY ,AS TRUSTEE OF THE INDYMAC IMSC MORTGAGELOAN TRUST 2007-ARl, MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGHCERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007-ARl UNDER THEPO OL IN G A ND SERVICING A GR EEM EN T D AT EDJUNE 1, 2007,

Plaintiff,v. Case No. 11-01744Division FDANIEL ST. HILAIRE and LINDA ST. HILAIRE, e t. a I.

Defendants,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1

O R DER G RA NT IN G MOT ION T O D ISM ISS C OM P LA IN TTHIS CAUSE, having come before the Court on agreement of the parties in lieu of a

hearing on the Motion to Dismiss of Defendant DANIEL ST. HILAIRE and LINDA ST.HILAIRE, and the Court, being duly advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND

ADJUDGED as follows:I. The Mo tio n to Dismiss be and is hereby DENIED as to Defendants' arguments on

Plaintiff's capacity to sue, the requirement of a 57.011 cost bond and the requirement to attach apurported notice of default.

2. The Motion to Dismiss be and is hereby GRANTED as to all other arguments asset forth in the motion. The Complaint be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice.Plaintiff shall have sixty (60) days from the date of this Order to file a Verified AmendedComplaint in compliance with Fla. Stat. 95.525. Defendant shall have thirty (30) days thereafterto serve a response. If Plaintiff fails to timely amend, Plaintiff's Complaint shall stand as


22/22

dismissed without further action.DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Hillsborough County, Florida on thisIIday of June, 2011. ORIGINAL SIGNED 1

JU N 2 7 2 0 1 1 IlR.>\ lPH STE INBERGSENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGECircuit Court Judgcc: Mark P. Stopa, Esq.Jason A. Bavol, Esq.

2

stopa letter to judge levens re motions to dismiss

Documents