Appellate Judges

BDF Hopkins Evidence for the Lender Lacks Credibility and Prima Facie Evidence to Warrant Foreclosure

There is NO AFFIDAVIT on the docket at the N.D. Tex. district court which qualifies as PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE of service in this foreclosure.

Fifth Circuit Judges aka “No Free Houses” Higginbotham, “The Forgetful Constitutionalist” Willett and “the Insurance Scammer” Duncan Comprise this Whiteout Foreclosure Panel

AUG 30, 2021 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: SEP 6, 2021

LIT COMMENTARY

The argument by the panel: “There is no evidence in the record that Paul Stafford provided the lender or loan servicer with a written change of address. That they had his new address is of no legal consequence.” is absurd.

Bank of America Home Loans sent out the notices in 2015 to both addresses for Stafford on the same day. How would BOFA know the new address unless the Staffords advised them?

Exhibit A-5, Doc 21-1 shows in 2017 it was BDF Hopkins who sent out the notices and not Bank of America. Hence, BDF, care of the mortgage servicer, would have received or would enjoy full access to the loan file with notes – as is required by the CFPB to comply with the law. It would also appear the failure to send a copy to the current known address of the Staffords was therefore intentional and with malicious intent.

Either way, the full loan file with notes should provide clarity on this issue and as such the Staffords claims could and should have defeated summary judgment. The case at minimum warranted reverse and remand with instructions to provide the Staffords with the full loan, including notes to ascertain how BOFA knew to send the notice to both addresses on the same day and yet BDF chose not to send it to both.

Furthermore, it could also shed light on the Staffords other claim about “The lender sent the notice of default on January 15, 2015. However, the lender later indicated that the loan entered default in April 2015. The Staffords argue that they could not have received notice in January of a default that did not occur until April.” The court goes off in a tangent regarding this critical admission. What’s important is the fact it questions the credibility of the lender and/or affidavit in support.

The affidavit of Michael J. Paterno, Ex. A, executed on 9 Oct., 2019 is not credible and lacks the “personal knowledge” required.

First, he admits Fay Servicing received the loan file and documents and those become business records for Fay and as such he has personal  knowledge of them in order to sign the affidavit under the penalty of perjury. BOFA sent the notices in 2015 to both of Staffords addresses. Paterno admitted to this in his affidavit, point 8.

Second, Paterno confirms at point 9 in his affidavit, that the 2017/18 “Notices of Acceleration were sent to Plaintiffs by counsel for Wilmington.”  As such, Paterno could not possibly personally know the facts surrounding the notices sent by BDF Hopkins, nor why the notices were not sent to both addresses. Indeed, Paterno does not attest to personally know about these facts in his affidavit, as required in law.

See; Perkins v. Bank of Am., 602 F. App’x 178, 5 (5th Cir. 2015) (“The record contains both a copy of the notice of default that was sent to Perkins and an affidavit of Cynthia Durant-Foor, an employee of National Default Exchange L.P., which was the service provider for Barrett Daffin.

Durant-Foor states in her affidavit that “[to] the best of my knowledge and belief, proper notice of default was served prior to acceleration of the indebtedness.”

She further states in her affidavit that

“[a]ll obligations and duties of the Mortgage Servicer were provided in the manner required by law.”

Durant-Foor’s affidavit is prima facie evidence that the notice of default was sent in compliance with Tex. Prop. Code § 51.002. See Martins v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., 722 F.3d 249, 256 (5th Cir. 2013) (holding that BAC had satisfied its burden of proof that a notice of sale had been sent by showing proof of the mailing and by submitting an affidavit).”)

In short, Paterno’s affidavit is not prima facie evidence.

In summary, it is also very noticeable that the case commenced on Dec 13, 2018 and  9 months or so later Hopkins appears on Oct 1, 2019, a motion for summary judgment is filed on Oct 10 with the affidavit by Paterno signed on Oct 9 and by March 30, 2019  and without any discovery or depositions in the interim period, the court grants the lender summary judgment. This happens all to often in pro se foreclosure cases where BDF Hopkins are involved and it’s all premeditated.

Paul Stafford; Telea Stafford

versus

Wilmington Trust National Association, not in its individual capacity but solely as trustee for MFRA Trust 2014-2 Servicing; Fay Servicing, L.L.C.

Tex. Prop. Code § 51.002

(2) “Debtor’s last known address” means:
(A) for a debt secured by the debtor’s residence,
the debtor’s residence address unless the debtor provided the
mortgage servicer a written change of address before the date the
mortgage servicer mailed a notice required by Section 51.002;

or

(“(e) Service of a notice under this section by certified mail is complete when the notice is deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid and addressed to the debtor at the debtor’s last known address. The affidavit of a person knowledgeable of the facts to the effect that service was completed is prima facie evidence of service.”)

Before Higginbotham, Willett, and Duncan, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam:*

After defaulting on their mortgage payments, Paul and Telea Stafford sued their lender in an attempt to stave off a foreclosure. They contend that the lender breached the loan agreement by (1) sending a notice of default that did not correspond to the date of default and (2) failing to send the notice of acceleration to Paul Stafford’s correct address.

The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants.1 We affirm.

The Staffords first challenge the timing of the notice of default and the apparent date of default. Before the district court, they raised this argument ambiguously, if at all.

Generally, arguments not raised before the district court are waived.

State Indus. Prods. Corp. v. Beta Tech., Inc., 575 F.3d 450, 456 (5th Cir. 2009).

In any event, the argument fails.

The lender sent the notice of default on January 15, 2015. However, the lender later indicated that the loan entered default in April 2015. The Staffords argue that they could not have received notice in January of a default that did not occur until April.

The January notice, they contend, was thus ineffective.

Though logical on its face, the Staffords’ argument ignores important context.

It is undisputed that the Staffords defaulted on the loan in December 2014.

They then made partial payments, which the lender applied to the loan.

As a result, the contractual due date for the accelerated loan was April 1, 2015.

The Staffords don’t contest the lender’s authority to apply the partial payments to the loan instead of to cure the December 2014 default.

And the Staffords provide no support for their contention that they should have received an additional notice of default after April 2015.

The Staffords next argue that the lender sent the notice of acceleration to Paul Stafford at the wrong address, rendering it ineffective.

The lender sent the notice of acceleration to the mortgaged property in October 2018.

But Paul Stafford had not resided at that address since 2013.

And the lender had knowledge of his new address—it sent the January 2015 notice of default to him there.

The Staffords therefore argue that the lender should have sent the October 2018 notice of acceleration to his new address, rather than to the address of the mortgaged property where he had not resided for years.

Practically, yes. Legally, no.

Texas law required the lender to serve Paul Stafford at his “last known address.”

Tex. Prop. Code § 51.002(e).

And “for a debt secured by the debtor’s residence,” the “last known address” is statutorily defined as “the debtor’s residence address unless the debtor provided the mortgage servicer a written change of address before the date the  mortgage  servicer  mailed  a  notice  required  by  Section  51.002.”

Id. 51.0001(2)(A).

There is no evidence in the record that Paul Stafford provided the lender or loan servicer with a written change of address.

That they had his new address is of no legal consequence.

AFFIRMED.

What’s Defined As Legal Extortion and Do Attorneys Receive Immunity from Prosecution?

Attorney Mousavi was thereby attempting to obtain the property . . . from another . . . by a wrongful use of force or fear, which is extortion.

Picture this… Homeowner Costilla Shared a Lake View with Mark and Shelley Hopkins…

Once again in their own backyard of W.D. Tex., Hopkins Law PLLC lawyers Mark and Shelley Hopkins obtain a rapid foreclosure judgment.

Retaliating Against a Federal Judge – Man Jailed for 18 Months

Frank Caporusso, a Long Island man who left a threatening voicemail last year for the judge presiding over the Michael Flynn case

U.S. District Court
Northern District of Texas (Dallas)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 3:18-cv-03274-N

Stafford et al v. Wilmington Trust National Association, et al
Assigned to: Judge David C Godbey

Case in other court:  USCA5, 20-11075
101st District Court of Dallas County, Texas, DC-18-18006

Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal

Date Filed: 12/13/2018
Date Terminated: 09/21/2020
Jury Demand: Both
Nature of Suit: 220 Real Property: Foreclosure
Jurisdiction: Diversity
Plaintiff
Paul Stafford represented by Paul Stafford
12923 Epps Field Rd.
Farmers Branch, TX 75234
PRO SEMatthew W. Bourda
Gray Reed & McGraw, LLP
1300 Post Oak Blvd.
Suite 2000
Houston, TX 77056
(713) 986-7126
Fax: (713) 730-5969
Email: mbourda@grayreed.com
TERMINATED: 06/05/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingPaul K Stafford
Stafford Law Firm, P.C.
P. O. Box 710404
Dallas, TX 75371
214-649-3405
Fax: 214-580-8104
Email: paul@staffordfirmpc.com
TERMINATED: 07/15/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingRobert Chamless Lane
The Lane Law Firm PLLC
6200 Savoy Drive, Suite 1150
Houston, TX 77036
713-595-8200
Fax: 713-595-8201
Email: notifications@lanelaw.com
TERMINATED: 07/15/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Plaintiff
Telea Stafford represented by Telea Stafford
12923 Epps Field Rd.
Farmers Branch, TX 75234
PRO SEMatthew W. Bourda
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 06/05/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingPaul K Stafford
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 07/15/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingRobert Chamless Lane
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 07/15/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
V.
Defendant
Wilmington Trust National Association
Not in its Individual Capacity, but solely as trustee for MFRA Trust 2014-2 Servicing
represented by Crystal Gee Gibson
Barrett Daffin Frappier Turner & Engel
4004 Belt Line Road, Suite 100
Addison, TX 75001
972-340-7901
Fax: 972-341-0734
Email: crystalr@bdfgroup.com
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingMark Daniel Hopkins
Hopkins Law PLLC
3 Lakeway Centre Ct.
Suite 110
Austin, TX 78734
512-600-4320
Email: mark@hopkinslawtexas.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingShelley L. Hopkins
Hopkins Law, PLLC
3 Lakeway Centre Ct.
Suite 110
Austin, TX 78734
512-600-4320
Email: shelley@hopkinslawtexas.com
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Defendant
Fay Servicing LLC represented by Crystal Gee Gibson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingMark Daniel Hopkins
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingShelley L. Hopkins
(See above for address)
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Counter Claimant
Fay Servicing LLC
TERMINATED: 09/21/2020
represented by Crystal Gee Gibson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingMark Daniel Hopkins
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Counter Claimant
Wilmington Trust National Association
Not in its Individual Capacity, but solely as trustee for MFRA Trust 2014-2 Servicing
TERMINATED: 09/21/2020
represented by Crystal Gee Gibson
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingMark Daniel Hopkins
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
V.
Counter Defendant
Paul Stafford
TERMINATED: 09/21/2020
represented by Matthew W. Bourda
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 06/05/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingPaul K Stafford
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 07/15/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingRobert Chamless Lane
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 07/15/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing
Counter Defendant
Telea Stafford
TERMINATED: 09/21/2020
represented by Matthew W. Bourda
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 06/05/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingPaul K Stafford
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 07/15/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good StandingRobert Chamless Lane
(See above for address)
TERMINATED: 07/15/2019
Bar Status: Admitted/In Good Standing

 

Date Filed # Docket Text
12/13/2018 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL WITH JURY DEMAND from 101st District of Dallas County, case number dc-18-18006 filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association. (Filing fee $400; receipt number 0539-9644996) In each Notice of Electronic Filing, the judge assignment is indicated, and a link to the Judges Copy Requirements is provided. The court reminds the filer that any required copy of this and future documents must be delivered to the judge, in the manner prescribed, within three business days of filing. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms and Instructions found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: Attorney Information – Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) A-State court Pleadings, # 2 Exhibit(s) B- Notice to State Court of Removal, # 3 Cover Sheet C-Civil Cover Sheet, # 4 Cover Sheet D-Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet, # 5 Exhibit(s) E-Disclosure St and Certificate of Int Parties, # 6 Exhibit(s) F-Dallas Co CAD, # 7 Exhibit(s) G-List of All Counsel) (Gibson, Crystal) (Entered: 12/13/2018)
12/13/2018 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has been paid. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge (Judge Horan). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (ala) (Entered: 12/13/2018)
12/20/2018 3 ANSWER to Complaint with Jury Demand filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms and Instructions found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: Attorney Information – Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge., COUNTERCLAIM against All Plaintiffs filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Exhibit 1 – Note, # 2 Exhibit(s) Exhibit 2 – Deed of Trust, # 3 Exhibit(s) Exhibit 3 – Notice of Default, # 4 Exhibit(s) Exhibit 3a – Proof of Mailing – Notice of Default, # 5 Exhibit(s) Exhibit 4 – Notice of Acceleration, # 6 Exhibit(s) Exhibit 4a – Proof of Mailing – Notice of Acceleration) (Gibson, Crystal) (Entered: 12/20/2018)
12/21/2018 4 ORDER REQUIRING STATUS AND SCHEDULING CONFERENCE: The parties are directed to confer within 21 days of the date of this Order, and report to the Court within 21 days after the conference the parties’ position. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 12/21/2018) (zkc) (Entered: 12/21/2018)
01/02/2019 5 ANSWER to Counterclaim filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford. Related document: 3 Answer to Complaint Counterclaim (Lane, Robert). (Entered: 01/02/2019)
01/08/2019 6 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE REPORT filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford. (Bourda, Matthew) (Entered: 01/08/2019)
01/10/2019 7 SCHEDULING ORDER: Trial set for one week docket beginning 1/13/2020 before Judge David C Godbey. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 1/10/2019) (mla) (Entered: 01/10/2019)
01/23/2019 8 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford. (Bourda, Matthew) (Entered: 01/23/2019)
01/23/2019 9 PLAINTIFFS’ INITIAL DISCLOSURES by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford. (Bourda, Matthew) Modified text on 1/24/2019 (ykp). (Entered: 01/23/2019)
06/04/2019 10 Unopposed MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney Matthew W. Bourda filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Bourda, Matthew) (Entered: 06/04/2019)
06/05/2019 11 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 10 Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Matthew W. Bourda is withdrawn as Counsel for the Plaintiffs. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 6/5/2019) (ewd) (Entered: 06/05/2019)
07/08/2019 12 Unopposed MOTION to Withdraw as Counsel for Plaintiffs filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Consent, # 2 Proposed Order) (Lane, Robert) (Entered: 07/08/2019)
07/08/2019 13 Unopposed MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney THE LANE LAW FIRM PLLC filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) EXHIBIT 1, # 2 Proposed Order ORDER FOR UNOPPOSED MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS) (Lane, Robert) (Entered: 07/08/2019)
07/09/2019 14 ELECTRONIC ORDER finding as moot 12 Motion to Withdraw per 13 Amended Motion to Withdraw. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 7/9/2019) (chmb) (Entered: 07/09/2019)
07/10/2019 15 Unopposed MOTION to Amend/Correct 13 Unopposed MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney THE LANE LAW FIRM PLLC filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order ORDER FOR UNOPPOSED AMENDED MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS) (Lane, Robert) (Entered: 07/10/2019)
07/15/2019 16 ELECTRONIC ORDER granting 15 Unopposed Motion to Withdraw. It is hereby ORDERED that The Lane Law Firm PLLC, and Robert Chamless Lane, attorney, is withdrawn as counsel for Plaintiffs Paul and Telea Stafford. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 7/15/2019) (ewd) (Entered: 07/15/2019)
07/31/2019 17 Mail returned as undeliverable. 16 Order on Motion to Amend/Correct, received back from Telea Staffor as RTS. No address update from last filed document. The current document has not been re-mailed. (epm) (Entered: 07/31/2019)
09/16/2019 18 Designation of Experts by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association. (Gibson, Crystal) (Entered: 09/16/2019)
10/01/2019 19 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Mark Daniel Hopkins on behalf of Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association. (Filer confirms contact info in ECF is current.) (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 10/01/2019)
10/10/2019 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association Attorney Mark Daniel Hopkins added to party Fay Servicing LLC(pty:cc), Attorney Mark Daniel Hopkins added to party Wilmington Trust National Association(pty:cc) (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 10/10/2019)
10/10/2019 21 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association re 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s)) (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 10/10/2019)
10/16/2019 22 MOTION for Continuance and Extension of Discovery and Scheduling Order Deadlines and for Entry of First Amended Scheduling Order filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford. (axm) (Entered: 10/16/2019)
10/23/2019 23 RESPONSE filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association re: 22 MOTION for Continuance and Extension of Discovery and Scheduling Order Deadlines (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 10/23/2019)
10/30/2019 24 REPLY filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford re: 23 Response/Objection. (ndt) (Entered: 10/31/2019)
10/31/2019 25 NOTICE of Attorney Appearance by Paul K Stafford on behalf of Paul Stafford. (Filer confirms contact info in ECF is current.) (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 10/31/2019)
10/31/2019 26 RESPONSE filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford re: 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 10/31/2019)
10/31/2019 27 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford re 26 Response/Objection to Motion for Summary Judgment (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) Declaration of Telea Stafford) (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 10/31/2019)
11/01/2019 28 ORDER granting 22 Motion to Extend Time. The Court finds good cause to grant the continuance and therefore vacates the current scheduling order deadlines and trial setting. The Court will issue a new scheduling order and reset the case for trial. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 11/1/2019) (aaa) (Entered: 11/01/2019)
11/05/2019 29 REPLY filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association re: 20 MOTION for Summary Judgment (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 11/05/2019)
01/27/2020 30 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER: Trial reset for one-week docket beginning 5/18/2020 before Judge David C Godbey. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 1/27/2020) (chmb) (Entered: 01/27/2020)
02/10/2020 31 MOTION to Quash Oral Depositions of Plaintiffs and for Protective Order filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 02/10/2020)
02/10/2020 32 RESPONSE filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association re: 31 MOTION to Quash Oral Depositions of Plaintiffs and for Protective Order (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s)) (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 02/10/2020)
02/10/2020 33 REPLY filed by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford re: 31 MOTION to Quash Oral Depositions of Plaintiffs and for Protective Order (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit(s) 1) (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 02/10/2020)
02/11/2020 34 Sur-reply filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association re: 31 MOTION to Quash Oral Depositions of Plaintiffs and for Protective Order (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 02/11/2020)
03/04/2020 35 Designation of Experts by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association. (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 03/04/2020)
03/30/2020 36 Memorandum Opinion and Order: The Court grants Defendants summary judgment on all Plaintiffs claims. Further, the Court grants Defendants summary judgment on their breach of contract claim. Defendants are statutorily entitled to proceed with foreclosure. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 3/30/2020) (ndt) (Entered: 03/30/2020)
04/01/2020 37 NOTICE of Dismissal of Counterclaim for Declaratory Relief Only filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 04/01/2020)
04/30/2020 38 MOTION for Reconsideration re Order Receipt filed by Paul Stafford with Brief/Memorandum in Support. (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 04/30/2020)
04/30/2020 39 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Paul Stafford re 38 MOTION for Reconsideration re Order Receipt (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 04/30/2020)
05/11/2020 40 ELECTRONIC ORDER finding as moot 31 Motion to Quash per 36 Memorandum Opinion and Order. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 5/11/2020) (chmb) (Entered: 05/11/2020)
05/18/2020 41 RESPONSE filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association re: 38 MOTION for Reconsideration re Order Receipt (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 05/18/2020)
05/18/2020 42 Brief/Memorandum in Support filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association re 41 Response/Objection (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 05/18/2020)
09/09/2020 43 ORDER: This Order addresses Plaintiffs Paul Stafford and Telea Stafford’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) motion for reconsideration of the Court’s order granting summary judgment 38 . Because the Court finds no good cause, the Court denies the motion. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 9/9/2020) (ctf) (Entered: 09/09/2020)
09/11/2020 44 MOTION to Enter Final Judgment filed by Fay Servicing LLC, Wilmington Trust National Association (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Hopkins, Mark) (Entered: 09/11/2020)
09/21/2020 45 ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANTS’ COUNTERCLAIM FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF. IT IS ORDERED that Defendants Wilmington and Fay’s Counterclaim for Declaratory Relief is dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 9/21/2020) (jmg) (Entered: 09/21/2020)
09/21/2020 46 RULE 54(b) FINAL JUDGMENT: The Court orders that Plaintiffs take nothing by their claims against Defendants, and the Court dismisses those claims with prejudice. It is therefore ordered that Plaintiffs have defaulted on the Loan Agreement, and the default has not been cured. Plaintiffs owe at least $910,540.39 through 10/18/2019, as well as the per diem interest accruing thereafter at the per diem rate of $71.21 and other expenses continuing to accrue pursuant to the Note and Deed of Trust for which Plaintiffs are also obligated to pay. Court costs are taxed against Plaintiffs. All relief not expressly granted is denied. This is a final judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 9/21/2020) (jmg) (Entered: 09/21/2020)
10/21/2020 47 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 36 Memorandum Opinion and Order, 46 Judgment,,, to the Fifth Circuit by Paul Stafford, Telea Stafford. Filing fee $505, receipt number 0539-11286956. T.O. form to appellant electronically at Transcript Order Form or US Mail as appropriate. Copy of NOA to be sent US Mail to parties not electronically noticed. IMPORTANT ACTION REQUIRED: Provide an electronic copy of any exhibit you offered during a hearing or trial that was admitted into evidence to the clerk of the district court within 14 days of the date of this notice. Copies must be transmitted as PDF attachments through ECF by all ECF Users or delivered to the clerk on a CD by all non-ECF Users. See detailed instructions here. (Exception: This requirement does not apply to a pro se prisoner litigant.) Please note that if original exhibits are in your possession, you must maintain them through final disposition of the case. (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 10/21/2020)
01/29/2021 48 APPLICATION for Stay of Execution and to Set Bond Pursuant to Rule 62(b) filed by Paul Stafford (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Stafford, Paul) (Entered: 01/29/2021)
02/01/2021 49 AGREED ORDER granting 48 Motion to Stay Enforcement of Judgment and Set Security Pursuant to Rule 62(b). Plaintiffs shall cause the sum of $6,154.84 to be paid into the Court’s registry on a monthly basis during the pendency of Plaintiffs’ appeal, to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, of the Final Judgment entered in this case. [Doc. 46 ]. Each recurring monthly payment shall be paid into the registry of the Court on or before the 1st day of each recurring month. (Ordered by Judge David C Godbey on 2/1/2021) (axm) (Entered: 02/01/2021)
BDF Hopkins Evidence for the Lender Lacks Credibility and Prima Facie Evidence to Warrant Foreclosure
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Laws In Texas first started as an independent investigative blog about the Financial Crisis and how the Banks and Government are colluding against the citizens and homeowners of the State of Texas, relying upon a system of #FakeDocs and post-crisis legal precedents, specially created by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to foreclose on homeowners around this great State. We are not lawyers. We do not offer legal advice. That stated, LIT's Blog has grown tremendously during the three or so years it has been operating and our reach is now nationwide as we expand via our micro-blogs in various states. Join us as we strive to bring back justice and honor to our Judiciary and Government employees, paid for by Citizens.

Donate to LawsInTexas. Make a Difference.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We keep your data private and share your data only with third parties that make this service possible. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

© 2020-2023 LawInTexas com is an online trading name which is wholly owned by Blogger Inc., a nonprofit 501(c)(3) registered in Delaware. | All Rights Reserved.

To Top