BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC VS. DOMINICK ROMANOÂ (F-017911-13, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE), A-4521-15T4

In 2004 Dominick Romano borrowed $380,000 from SGB and executed a promissory note and mortgage (mortgage names Dominick and Sara Jean Romano).
The Note was endorsed from SGB to CitiMortgage, then to Bayview, and Bayview retained physical possession and endorsed in blank.
The mortgage was assigned by MERS (as nominee for SGB) to CitiMortgage in 2009, and CitiMortgage assigned the mortgage to Bayview in 2010; assignments were recorded.
Defendants defaulted in May 2009; Bayview sent a notice of default in 2012 and filed foreclosure in May 2013.
Bayview moved for summary judgment in 2014, submitting a certification from its document coordinator attaching the Note, endorsements, mortgage, and assignments as true copies; the trial court granted summary judgment and entered final judgment of foreclosure in 2016.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of custodian’s certification to prove chain of title and possession of the Note	Bayview: document coordinator’s certification and attached copies of business records satisfy Rule 1:6-6 and business-records exception	Romano: coordinator’s review is insufficient; custodian must produce underlying originals/foundation witness with personal knowledge of recorded events	Court: Certification complying with Rule 1:6-6 and N.J.R.E. 803(c)(6) was sufficient; attached copies and statement they are true copies provided required foundation
Standing to foreclose (possession/entitlement to enforce Note and mortgage)	Bayview: it was holder of the Note (possession) and assignee of the mortgage when suit was filed/motion made, so entitled to enforce	Romano: Bayview may not be mortgagee; later-servicing/assignment notices (to U.S. Bank as trustee) cast doubt on Bayview’s standing	Court: Bayview had possession of the Note and an assignment of the mortgage predating suit; therefore Bayview had standing and was entitled to summary judgment

Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am., 142 N.J. 520 (N.J. 1995) (summary judgment standard)
W.J.A. v. D.A., 210 N.J. 229 (N.J. 2012) (de novo review of summary judgment)
Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Mitchell, 422 N.J. Super. 214 (App. Div.) (foreclosure plaintiff must possess the note or have mortgage assignment predating complaint)
New Century Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Oughla, 437 N.J. Super. 299 (App. Div.) (business-records foundation may be established without personal knowledge of recorded events)
State v. Martorelli, 136 N.J. Super. 449 (App. Div.) (foundation witness need not have personal knowledge of the event recorded)