Johnson v. U.S. Bank National Association
222 So. 3d 635
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- The Bank filed a verified complaint in April 2013 to foreclose a mortgage and to reestablish a lost note, attaching copies of the note, mortgage, an assignment of mortgage (assigning the mortgage from BNC to the Bank), and a lost-note affidavit.
- The note and mortgage identified BNC Mortgage, Inc. as lender; the copy of the note contained no endorsements and there was no assignment of the note in the record.
- The Bank introduced at trial an SSA showing the Bank as trustee for a trust but the SSA did not include a loan schedule listing the Johnsons' loan.
- The Bank produced two servicer screen printouts (acquisition and investor screens) dated after the complaint and a servicer employee who could not confirm whether or when the Johnsons’ loan entered the trust.
- The Johnsons moved for involuntary dismissal at the close of the Bank’s case, arguing lack of standing; the trial court denied the motion and entered final judgment for the Bank.
- On appeal the Second District reversed, holding the Bank failed to prove it was the holder of the note and remanded with instructions for involuntary dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to enforce the note (right to foreclose) | Bank argued its documentation (note, assignment of mortgage, SSA, servicer screens) established standing | Johnsons argued Bank failed to prove it held or was entitled to enforce the note because the note had no endorsements and no assignment of the note was shown | Bank did not prove it was the holder; standing not established; judgment reversed |
| Remedy after insufficient proof of standing | Bank argued case should be remanded for further proceedings to cure evidentiary gaps | Johnsons argued insufficiency required involuntary dismissal | Court held involuntary dismissal appropriate rather than remand |
Key Cases Cited
- Focht v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 124 So. 3d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (plaintiff must show status as holder of the note to have standing)
- Russell v. Aurora Loan Servs., LLC, 163 So. 3d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (trust documents must show the specific loan was included to prove standing via securitization)
- Schmidt v. Deutsche Bank, 170 So. 3d 938 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (insufficient evidence that loan was part of purchase agreement/trust undermines standing)
- Cutler v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 109 So. 3d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (standing focuses on enforceability of the note, not merely the mortgage)
- Dickson v. Roseville Props., LLC, 198 So. 3d 48 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (when plaintiff fails to prove standing at trial, involuntary dismissal is appropriate)
- Creadon v. U.S. Bank N.A., 166 So. 3d 952 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (same)
- Correa v. U.S. Bank N.A., 118 So. 3d 952 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (same)