Lindsey v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
139 So. 3d 903
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- In March 2007 Lindsey executed a promissory note to Option One Mortgage, secured by a mortgage on Lindsey’s Duval County property.
- Lindsey defaulted in January 2009 and received notice of default on his obligations under the note.
- On April 2, 2009 Wells Fargo filed suit to foreclose, alleging it owned and/or was entitled to enforce the Note and Mortgage; the complaint named Option One as lender/mortgagee.
- Wells Fargo filed the original note with the court and an Assignment of Mortgage dated April 10, 2009 showing transfer of the mortgage to Wells Fargo; the assignment did not transfer the note and the note lacked an endorsement to Wells Fargo.
- Lindsey answered, denying Wells Fargo owned/held the note and mortgage and raised an affirmative defense that Wells Fargo lacked standing.
- Wells Fargo moved for summary judgment in 2012; its affidavits did not attest to ownership of the note, and a Certification of Compliance was unsworn and blank as to date of the note assignment.
- The trial court granted a Final Judgment of Mortgage Foreclosure in April 2012; on appeal, the court reviews de novo and held Wells Fargo failed to prove standing or refute Lindsey’s standing defense, reversing and remanding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wells Fargo had standing to foreclose as of filing | Lindsey | Lindsey | Wells Fargo lacked standing; summary judgment improper |
| Whether the note was a bearer instrument enforceable by Wells Fargo | Lindsey | Wells Fargo | Note not bearer; not endorsed to Wells Fargo; standing not proven |
| Effect of mortgage assignment versus note ownership | Lindsey | Wells Fargo | Assignment of mortgage alone insufficient to prove note ownership at filing |
| Sufficiency of summary judgment evidence to prove ownership | Lindsey | Wells Fargo | Evidence failed to establish ownership of the note at filing |
Key Cases Cited
- Gonzalez v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 95 So.3d 251 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (failure to prove note ownership at filing defeats standing)
- Rigby v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 84 So.3d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (standing requires proof plaintiff owns/holds note at filing)
- Gee v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 72 So.3d 211 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (mortgage follows note; proof of ownership or endorsement necessary)
- Taylor v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 44 So.3d 618 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (assignment of note, not just boilerplate language, can confer standing)
- Harvey v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 69 So.3d 300 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (possession of original note endorsed in blank supports standing)
- Taylor v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, 74 So.3d 1115 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (mortgage follows the note; allonge and endorsements affect standing)
- Vidal v. Liquidation Props., Inc., 104 So.3d 1274 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (timing of assignment can affect standing issues in foreclosure)
- McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 79 So.3d 170 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (fact issues preclude summary judgment where note assignment timing is contested)