dbnt -v.-maraj kansas city shuffle

7/28/2019 DBNT -V.-marAJ Kansas City Shuffle

1/6

P R E S E N T :HON. ARTHUR M . SCHACK

JusticeDEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COh IPANYAS TRUSTEE UNDER THE POOLING AND ,SERVICING AGREEMENT SERIES INDEX 12006-AR6, I

Plaintiff,- against -

RAMASH MARAJ A/K/A RAMISH MARAJ, el. al.,Defendants.

At an IA S Term, Part 27 ofthe S upreme Court of theState of New York, held inand for the County ofKings, at the Courthouse,at Civ ic Center, Brooklyn,New York, on the 3 1st dayof January 2008

DECISION & ORDERIndex No. 2598 1/07

The following papers numbered 1 read on tliis motion: Papers Numbered:Proposed Order of Reference with A ffidavi i s h iibits 1

Pl ain tiff s application, upon the default 01all defendants, for an orde r of referencefor the premises located at 255 Lincoln Avenue, B rooklyn, Ne w Y ork (Block 41 50, Lot

-1-

-.-

www.StopF

oreclos

ureFraud

.com


2/6

I19, County of Kings) is denied without prejudice. with leave to renew upon providing theCourt with a satisfactory explanation to various questions with respect to the July 3, 2007assignment o f the instant mortgage to plaintiff, D IZUTSCHE BA NK N AT ION AL T RU STCOMPANY AS TRU STEE UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING AGREEMENTSERIES INDEX 2006-AR6 (DEUTSCH E BANK ). The questions deal with: theemployment history of one Erica Johnson-Seck, Lvho assigned the mortgage to plaintiffDE UTS CH E BAN K, and then subsequently executed the affidavit of facts in the instantapplication as an officer of DEU TSCH E BAN K; plaintiff DEU TSCH E BANK Spurchase of the instant non-performing loan; and, why IND YM AC B AN K, F.S.B.,(INDYMAC), Mortgage Electronic Registration Qystems,Inc. (MER S), andDE UT SCH E BANK all share office space at Building B, 901 East 104h Street, Suite400/500, Kansas City, MO 64131 (Suite 400/500).

II

Defendant RA MA SH M ARA J borrowed $440,000.00 from INDY MA C on March7,20 06. The note and mortgage were recorded in the O ffice o f the City Register, NewYork City Department of Finance on March 22 ,20 06 at City Register File Num ber(CR FN ) 2006000 16 1303. IND YM AC , by R.Tortg;ige Electronic Registration Systems,Inc. (MERS ), its nominee for the purpose of recording the m ortgage, assigned the noteand mortgage to plaintiff DE UT SCH E BANK , 011 July 3, 2007, with the assignmentrecorded on September 5,2 00 7 at CRFN 200700fl457140.

According to plaintiffs application, dzfentlant MAR AJs default began with the

-2-www.StopF

oreclos

ureFraud

.com


3/6

nonpayment of principal and interest due on March 1,2 00 7. Yet on July 3, 2007, morethan four months later, plaintiff DEUTSCH E BANK accepted the assignment of theinstant non-performing loan from INDY MA C. I urther, both assignor MERS, as nom ineeof INDYMAC, and assignee DEUTSCHE BANK list Suite 400/500 on the July 3,2 00 7Assignment as their principal place of business. To compound corporate togetherness,page 2 of the recorded A ssignm ent, lists Ihe sarric: Suite 400/500 as the address ofINDYMAC. I

The Assignment by M ERS, on behalf of IND YMA C, was executed by EricaJohnson-Seck, Vice President of MERS . The noiary public, Ma i La Thao, stated in thejurat that the assignm ent was executed in the Stale of Texas, County o f Williamson(Williamson C ounty is located in the Austin merJ-opolitan area, and its county seat isGeorgetown, Texas). Th e Court is perplexed as IO why the assignment was not executedin Kansas City, the alleged principal place of business for both the assignor and theassignee.

Twenty-eight d ays later, on July 3 1,2 007 . the same Erica Johnson-Seck executedpla int iff s affidavit subm itted in support of {he llstant application for a default judgment.Ms. Johnson-Seck, in her affidavit, states that sh r is an officer of Deutsche BankNational Trust Com pany as T rustee under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement SeriesINDX 2006-AR6, the plain tiff herein. At .the eiid of the affidavit she states that she is aVice President of DEU TSCH E BANK . Again, I I a i La Thao is the notary public and the

-3 -www.StopF

oreclos

ureFraud

.com


4/6

affidavit is executed in the Sta te of Texas, Counry of Williamson. Th e Erica Johnson-Seck signatures on both the July 3 ,2 00 7 assign1 nent and the July 3 1,2 00 7 affidavit areidentical. Did Ms. Johnson-Seck change emplo!,ers from July 3,20 07 to July 3 1,2 007 , ordoes she engage in self-dealing by wearing two ldorporate hats? Th e Court is concernedthat there may be fraud on the part of plaintiff DEUTSC HE BA NK, or at leastmalfeasance. Before g ranting an application for- an order of reference, the Court requiresan affidavit from Ms. Johnson-Seck, desc ribing !ier employm ent history fo r the past threeyears.

Further, the Court requires an explanatio1 from an officer of plaintiff DEUTSCHEIBANK as to why, in the middle of our national subprime mortgage financial crisis,

DEUT SCHE BAN K would purchase a non-perl Irm ing loan from IND YMA C, and whyDEUTSCHE BANK, INDYMAC and MEKS all share office space in Suite 400/500.

With the assignor MERS and assignce D IWTSCHE BANK appearing to beengaged in possible fraudulent activity by: having the same person execu te theassignment and then the affidavit of facts in support of the instant applica tion;DEUT SCHE BA NKS purchase of a non-pcrfomiing loan from IND YM AC; and, thesharing of office space in Suite 400/500 in K a n s x City, the Court wonders if the instantforeclosure action is a corporate Kansas City Sliuffle, a comp lex confidence game. Inthe 2006 film, Lucky Number Slevin, Mr. Goodkat, (a hitman played by B ruce W illis),explains (in mem orable quotes from Lucky Numlier Slevin, at

-4-www.StopF

oreclosure

F raud.co

m


5/6

www.imdb.com/title/tt4252 Olauotes).A K ansas City Shuffle is when everybod!, looks right, you go le f t . . .Its not some thing people hear about. Falls on deaf ears mostly . . .No sm all matter. Requires a lot of planning. Involves a lot ofIpeople. People connected by the slightesr of even ts. Like whispers inthe night, in that place that never forgets, w e n when those people do.IIn this foreclosure action is plaintiff DEUTSCHl: BANK, with its principal place of

business in Kansas C ity attempting to make the Court look right wh ile it goes left?IConclusionI

Accordingly, it isORD ERED , that the application of plaintiff, DE UT SCH E BANK NA TIONA L

TRUST COMPANY AS TRU STEE UNDE I


6/6

Idays of this decision and order, of: an affidavit irom Erica Johnson-Seck describing heremploym ent history for the past three years; and, an affidavit from an officer of plaintiffDEUTSCHE BANK NATION AL TRU ST CO h LPANY AS TRUSTE E UNDER THEPOOLING AN D SERVICING AGREEMENT SERIES INDEX 2006-AR6, explainingwhy (1) plaintiff purchased a nonperforming loan from IN DY MA C BA NK , F.S.B., (2 )shares office space at Build ing B, 901 East 10'1"' Street, Suite 400/500, Kansas City, MO64 13 1 with Mortgage Electronic Registration SJ stems, Inc. and INDYM AC BA NK,F.S.B., and (3), claims Building B, 901 East 1O.4lh Street, Suite 400/500, K ansas City, MO64131 as its principal place of business in the Assignment o f the instant mortgage and yetexecuted the Assignm ent and affidavit of facts in this action in Williamson County,ITexas.

This constitutes the Decision and Order ( 1 {the Court.

E - N T E R

J. S . C.

-6-www.StopF

oreclos

ureFraud

.com

dbnt -v.-maraj kansas city shuffle

Documents