Kenney v. HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n, 175 So. 3d 377

In 2005 Kenney executed a promissory note (payable to American Brokers Conduit) and a mortgage securing it.
HSBC filed foreclosure on December 29, 2009; the complaint alleged HSBC was the present designated holder/servicer but attached a copy of the note without endorsements.
An Assignment of Mortgage dated January 4, 2010 (effective as of Dec. 1, 2009) was produced; it was executed after the complaint was filed.
At trial HSBC introduced the original note bearing a blank endorsement and the testimony of a Wells Fargo loan verification analyst; the analyst could not say when the endorsement was made or when HSBC acquired ownership.
The analyst testified Wells Fargo began servicing Aug. 1, 2006 and that a Deutsche Bank entity was the investor, while HSBC served as trustee; no pooling and servicing agreement (PSA) or other competent evidence showed a transfer to HSBC before suit.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether HSBC had standing to foreclose when it filed the complaint	HSBC asserted it was the designated holder/servicer and produced the note with a blank endorsement and the assignment	Kenney argued HSBC lacked possession/authority at filing and the assignment was executed after suit and could be backdated	Court held HSBC failed to prove standing at the time of filing; judgment reversed
Whether the post‑filing assignment and analyst testimony could cure standing defects	HSBC relied on the Assignment (stating an effective pre‑filing date) and analyst testimony about servicing and ownership	Kenney argued the assignment was insufficient without proof it was effective pre‑suit and the analyst lacked personal knowledge; no PSA was introduced	Court held the backdated assignment alone and vague analyst testimony were insufficient to establish pre‑suit standing
Whether introduction of the original note with undated blank endorsement proved standing	HSBC relied on possession of the original note bearing a blank endorsement	Kenney pointed out absence of testimony when the blank endorsement was made and no proof it existed at filing	Court held HSBC did not prove the endorsement occurred before filing and thus did not establish holder status

Dixon v. Express Equity Lending Grp., 125 So.3d 965 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (de novo review applies to standing question)
McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 79 So.3d 170 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (plaintiff must prove standing when complaint filed)
Focht v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 124 So.3d 308 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (methods to establish standing include endorsed note, assignment, or affidavit)
Lloyd v. Bank of New York Mellon, 160 So.3d 513 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (undated/blank endorsement requires additional evidence showing endorsement pre‑dated complaint)
May v. PHH Mortg. Corp., 150 So.3d 247 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (possession of a blank‑endorsed note at filing must be proven)
Matthews v. Fed. Nat’l Mortg. Ass’n, 160 So.3d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (backdated assignment alone does not establish standing)
Vidal v. Liquidation Props., Inc., 104 So.3d 1274 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (retroactive assignments cannot satisfy pre‑suit ownership requirement)
Jelic v. LaSalle Bank, Nat’l Ass’n, 160 So.3d 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (absence of evidence that depositor intended to transfer interest to trustee undermines trustee’s standing)
Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. v. Boglioli, 154 So.3d 494 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (failure to introduce PSA and proof of endorsement timing defeated standing)

Court disposition: Final judgment of foreclosure reversed; case remanded for involuntary dismissal for lack of standing.