Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
.........................................................x
US BANK, NA, AS LEGAL TITLE
TRUSTEE FOR TRUMAN 2016 SC6 TITLE
TRUST,
Plaintiff NOTICE OF MOTION FOR
RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT
Index No. 301/2010
-against-
705854/2021
ASHMEEN MODIKHAN, et al.,
Hon: Phillip Hom
Defendants
............................................................................X
Upon the Motion of Defendant, ASHMEEN MODIKHAN, pro se, Defendant will move
this Court Part 14 at the Courthouse, 25-10 Court Square, Courtroom 233, Long Island City,
New York 11101 on Thursday March 02,2023, at 9:30 a.m. or as soon as Ashmeen Modikhan
may be heard, for an order to for Relief from Judgment the Plaintiff's case.
8'
Ashmeen Modiklfan t 2 2 Da e
Ê;' *
Plaintiff, in pro per Î É
1 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF QUEENS
.........................................................x
US BANK, NA, AS LEGAL TITLE
TRUSTEE FOR TRUMAN 2016 SC6 TITLE
MOTION FORRELIEF FROM
TRUST, JUDGMENT
Plaintiff
Index No. 301/2010
-against-
705854/2021
ASHMEEN MODIKHAN, et al., .
Hon: Justice Phillip Hom
Defendants
............................................................................X
COMES NOW, Defendant ASHMEEN MODIKHAN pursuant to NY CPLR § R5015
(2012), and files this Motion for Relief from Judgment. Plaintiff prays this Court grant her relief
from this Court's judgment issued on October 13, 2022, which Order Confirmed the Referee
Report and Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale.
GROUNDS FOR RELIEF
1. This Motion for Relief from Judgment will be based on the grounds that there has
been both extrinsic and intrinsic fraud, which has impeded the just prosecution of the case.
Further, the judgment is void since it was based on fraud.
There has been both extrinsic and intrinsic fraud
2. "CPLR R5015(a)(3) provides that a party may be relieved of a judgement or
order upon the ground of "fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party".
"
The fraud contemplated by CPLR R5015(a)(3) may be extrinsic or intrinsic. Citimortgage, Inc.
v. Orichello, 5833/09, 2 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2011).
matter."
3. "Extrinsic fraud ... deprives[s] a party from fully and fairly litigating a
See Shaw v. Shaw, 97 AD2d 403 [2nd Dept. 1983]; see also Citimortgage, Inc. v. Orichello,
5833/09, 2 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2011).
-1-
2 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
4. Allegations of extrinsic fraud do not require a moving party to establish a
reasonable excuse for its default or a meritorious defense. See Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co. v.
Gillio, 2009 NY Slip Op 50383U; 22 Misc 3d 1131 (A) [NY Sup. 2009].
5. Conversely, intrinsic fraud generally concerns a fraudulent instrument or false
representation and requires a moving party to demonstrate a meritorious defense and a
reasonable excuse for its default. See Bank of New York v. Lagakos, 27 AD3d 678 [2nd Dept.
2006].
6. Defendant contends that the plaintiff and plaintiff counsel's engaged in extrinsic
fraud in the assignment of defendant's mortgage. Besides, extrinsic fraud was used to procure the
foreclosure through Proof of Claim 5.1 in the Court Case No: 19-46591-
judgment, Bankruptcy
JMM. (Exhibit "A") The foregoing affected the prosecution of this case.
7. For proof of claim 5.1, Part 1, question 2 of Form 410, of the proof of claim
alleged that the claim had not been acquired from someone else. Further, "U.S. Bank National
Trust"
Association as Legal Title Trustees for Truman 2016 SC6 Title averred that they are the
Creditors. Truman further directed that any and all payments be directed to Fay Servicing LLC.
Defendant avers that Truman is not a creditor because there was no privity of contract between
the Defendant, on one hand, and Fay or the Howard Beach property servicer on the other hand.
Defendant also maintains that Fay and the Howard Beach Property Servicer are not creditors
buyer"' collectors"
because they are "bulk debt or "debt as opposed to creditors.
"holders"
8. Accordingly, Defendant contends that the there are no identifiable of
the note as per the DOJ sentencing memorandum of June 3rd 2016. Besides, no party filed
and/or presented any fact witness to prove their ownership of the original note, or chain of
possession of the original note.
-2-
3 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
9. The notes presented in the courts were invalid. The note presented for the Howard
Beach Property was not properly assigned to US Bank Trust N.A. as Legal Title Trustee for
Trust"
Truman 2016 SC6 Title Trust ("Truman Trust") and neither "Truman nor Fay Servicing,
are included as Plaintiff in the underlying foreclosure. The endorsement on the note is also
ineffective because it appears to be a stamped signature (instead of a live signature) of a well-
"robo-signer"
documented for Countrywide Home Loans, Michele Sjolander. According to
Michele Sjolander's testimony on January 25, 2012, in Kirby vs Bank of America, N.A. US
Southern District of Mississippi, Hattiesburg case number 09-CV-00182-DCB-JMR, she worked
for Recontrust and not Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. in 2007. (Exhibit "B")
10. Michele Sjolander further testified there were multiple stamps with her signature
on them. She testified that while she had some sort of power of attorney to allow others to use
her stamps, she did not know who the people using her stamp were, she was never in the same
room where the stamps were being used and did not have the security clearance to be in the room
where her multiple stamps were being used to endorsed notes. Therefore, she had no control of
stamps with her signature or personal knowledge to endorse alleged original notes for a company
she wasn't even employed by. Further, the redactions on the mortgage assignments and cover
sheets are indicative of an attempt by the creditor's counsel to conceal identifying markings.
"assignments"
Many of the were not cross-referenced under the borrower's name or address. By
redacting public information, i.e. Control recorder numbers and dates recorded, it would deter
many from finding the actual recorded document for other valuable information.
11. It is also notable that the Pooling and Servicing Agreement does not convey
"ownership"
of the assets of the trust. It only conveys the revenue of that trust. Defendant further
"certificates"
asserts that there are no (and there has never been) any adduced in court as proof of
-3-
4 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
possession of the original note. Only ledger entries in a computer were presented. It is also
noteworthy that 99% of all notes were insured and paid off within the 90 days of default.
12. Defendant maintains that this Court should not turn a blind eye to the extensive
fraud that Plaintiff and Plaintiff counsel's committed. It completely flies in the face of justice, for
the courts to sanction blatant disregard of the law. As Defendant has shown above, the
proceedings were based on constant lies as to the owner of the original note. False evidence was
presented in that the original note was not presented to the court in support of the proof of claims
bankruptcy court and the summons and complaint in this court. Besides, Rosicki, Rosicki &
Associates admitted, in an unrelated case, to fraudulent firm practices in presenting foreclosure
cases between 2009-2018 and were penalized by the court (in United States ex rel. Grubea v.
Rosicki, Rosicki & Assocs., 12-cv-7199). (Exhibit "C")
The judgment is void: the Plaintiff lacked the standing to bring the suit
13. CPLR 5015 (a)(4) authorizes a court to vacate a judgment "upon the ground of
lack of jurisdiction to render the judgment. See Weinstock v. Citibank, 289 A.D.2d 326; Empire
of Am. Realty Credit Corp. v. Smith, 227 A.D.2d 931, 932; Laurenzano v. Laurenzano, 222
A.D.2d 560, 560-561.
14. It is trite law that the plaintiff must prove it's standing in order to be entitled to
relief. See Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A. v Mastropaolo, 42 AD3d 239, 242; TPZ Corp. v Dabbs,
25 AD3d 787, 789; see also Society of Plastics Indus. v County of Suffolk, 77 NY2d 761, 769).
Standing requires an inquiry into whether a litigant has "an interest . . . in the lawsuit that the law
request"
will recognize as a sufficient predicate for determining the issue at the litigant's See
Caprer v Nussbaum, 36 AD3d 176, 182; see New York State Assn. of Nurse Anesthetists v
Nouello, 2 NY3d 207, 211; Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A. v Mastropaolo, 42 AD3d 239, 242).
-4-
5 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
15. In a mortgage foreclosure action, a plaintiff has standing where it is both the holder
and assignee of the subject mortgage and the holder or assignee of the underlying note at the time
the action is commenced. See Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v Coakley, 41 AD3d 674;
Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v Youkelsone, 303 AD2d 546, 546-547; First Trust Natl. Assn. v Meisels,
234 AD2d 414).
16. Either a written assignment of the underlying note or the physical delivery of the
note prior to the commencement of the foreclosure action is sufficient to transfer the obligation,
or the mortgage passes with the debt as an inseparable incident. See Weaver Hardware Co. v
Solomovitz, 235 NY 321; Payne v Wilson, 74 NY 348, 354-355 [1878]; LaSalle Bank Natl. Assn.
v Ahearn, 59 AD3d 911, 912; Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v Coakley, 41 AD3d at 674;
Flyer v Sullivan, 284 App Div 697, 699.
17. In the instant case, the foreclosure proceedings started without following the
disclosure requirements under UCC §§ 3-104 and 3-804. On or about April 09, 2009 Bank of
America sent mortgage statement stating they are servicing the loan for the holder of the note,
which they did not name. (Exhibit "D"). Furthermore, on January 05, 2010, BAC Home Loans,
through its counsel, Rosicki, filed a foreclosure complaint with no note or assignments. (Exhibit
"E") On January 20, 2010. Paramount Land, Inc., a company owned by one of the Partners of
Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates (Rosicki") the foreclosing law firm entered an assignment of
mortgage from MERS, as nominee for Countrywide Home Loans to BAC Home Loan Servicing
LP dated October 29, 2009, but effective November 7, 2008 (Exhibit "F") On September 12,
2012, Bank of America sent a letter stating they had transferred servicing rights to Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC (Exhibit "G") A year later, on October 10, 2012, Ocwen sent a letter stating the
"Loan"
had been transferred to BofA Merrill Lynch Asset Holdings, Inc. with Ocwen as its
-5 -
6 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
servicer of the loan. In January 2014, an assignment of mortgage was recorded stating another
transfer from Bank of America, NA to Christina Trust, a division of Willington Savings Fund
"
Society, FSB as trustee for ARLP Trust 3. (Exhibit H") Neither the plaintiff nor the plaintiff
counsel provided any records of payments applied, charges applied, interest calculations,
nothing to support the amount owed per the foreclosure complaint. In fact, no party since the
foreclosure case has ever shown possession of the original April 24, 2007 in favor of Countrywide
Home Loans, Inc.
18. Besides, a status conference was ordered June 04, 2014 with instructions for the
Plaintiff counsel to present the wet-ink note on July 23, 2014. (Exhibit "I") Counsel for BAC
Home Loan Servicing LP failed to comply with the term of the order to produce the note. Notably,
the foreclosure court issued an order to dismiss the case Pre-Note. (Exhibit "J")
19. On or about August 2016, the Plaintiff counsel Dennis A. Amore of Clarfield,
Okon, Salomone & Pincus. P.L. filed a Motion to Restore the case on the bases of "excusable
default'
for not complying with CPLR 5015. The motion was based on hearsay and lack of full
disclosure. (Exhibit "K") On May 19, 2017, Fay Servicing, LLC the new alleged servicer claims
the loan was sold, assigned, or transferred to Truman 2016 SC6 Title Trust (Exhibit "L") On June
30, 2017 the alleged attorney in fact for ARLP Trust recorded an assignment of mortgage on July
28., 2017 by Meridian Asset Servicer Inc., stating the loan was assigned from ARLP Trust 3 to
Truman 2016 SC6 Trust. (Exhibit "M") On December 11, 2017, seven years after the original
complaint was filed, Gross Polowy, LLC filed an alleged copy of the note. As the evidence
presented there have been several entities claiming the note with few named in this case. It
follows; the fact that there have been issues with the original note since the time this case started
shows how Defendant's property rights stand to be violated by the illegal sale of the property.
- 6 -
7 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
20. Further, the fraudulent proof of claim denied this court subject matter jurisdiction.
The Plaintiff's lack of standing also denied the court personal jurisdiction. "[A] court is without
power to render a judgment against a party over whom the court lacks jurisdiction. A judgment
void"
rendered without jurisdiction is (emphasis added) See Berlin v Sordillo, 179 AD2d 717,
719 ; see Diaz v Perez, 113 AD3d 421, 421; U S. Bank, N.A. v Bernhardt, 88 AD3d 871, 872.
21. As discussed above, the Court turned a blind eye to the fraud, amidst Defendant's
unrelenting filings, which tried to bring the Court's attention to the fraud. The court further
turned a blind eye to the fact that it lacked jurisdiction to hear and determine this case.
CONCLUSION
22. For a long time now, Defendant has been subjected to a lot of harm as she tried to
pursue justice and protect her property rights. Her children are also suffering from the
costs and implications of endless litigation. Her suffering will be further aggravated by the
sale of the said property following the illegal foreclosure.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court should issue an Order reversing its previous
judgment issued on October 13, 2022, which Order Confirmed the Referee Report and Judgment
of Foreclosure and Sale. Plaintiff further prays that this Court issues any other order it deems just.
Dated: /f 7
Ashmeet Modikhan,
In Pro Per
- 7 -
8 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023
VERIFICATION
I, Ashmeen Modikhan, a New York State Citizen and one of the People of New York,
makes this Verification based on personal knowledge of matters set forth herein and appearing
without waiving any rights or remedies, being competent in mind and body to testify, do hereby
declare, verify and affirm that the facts stated herein are true, correct, and complete in all
material fact, not misrepresented based on my own knowledge to the best of my current
information, knowledge and belief under the penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States
of America and the laws of New York , and is admissible as evidence in a court of law or equity,
except as to those matters that are therein made upon information and belief, and as to those
claims or facts, I believe them to be true and admissible as evidence, and if called upon as a
witness, I will testify as to the veracity of my statements.
Entered this day of rug , 20
Ashmeen Modikhan
Se a l
SUSAN LOUGHLIN
- State of New York
Notary Public
No. 04LO6430887
Qualified in Queens County
Elfglon Expires Maren 21, 20dle
Printed Notar
My commission expires
- 8 -
9 of 165
FILED: QUEENS COUNT
Preview
FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS .........................................................x US BANK, NA, AS LEGAL TITLE TRUSTEE FOR TRUMAN 2016 SC6 TITLE TRUST, Plaintiff NOTICE OF MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT Index No. 301/2010 -against- 705854/2021 ASHMEEN MODIKHAN, et al., Hon: Phillip Hom Defendants ............................................................................X Upon the Motion of Defendant, ASHMEEN MODIKHAN, pro se, Defendant will move this Court Part 14 at the Courthouse, 25-10 Court Square, Courtroom 233, Long Island City, New York 11101 on Thursday March 02,2023, at 9:30 a.m. or as soon as Ashmeen Modikhan may be heard, for an order to for Relief from Judgment the Plaintiff's case. 8' Ashmeen Modiklfan t 2 2 Da e Ê;' * Plaintiff, in pro per Î É 1 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS .........................................................x US BANK, NA, AS LEGAL TITLE TRUSTEE FOR TRUMAN 2016 SC6 TITLE MOTION FORRELIEF FROM TRUST, JUDGMENT Plaintiff Index No. 301/2010 -against- 705854/2021 ASHMEEN MODIKHAN, et al., . Hon: Justice Phillip Hom Defendants ............................................................................X COMES NOW, Defendant ASHMEEN MODIKHAN pursuant to NY CPLR § R5015 (2012), and files this Motion for Relief from Judgment. Plaintiff prays this Court grant her relief from this Court's judgment issued on October 13, 2022, which Order Confirmed the Referee Report and Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale. GROUNDS FOR RELIEF 1. This Motion for Relief from Judgment will be based on the grounds that there has been both extrinsic and intrinsic fraud, which has impeded the just prosecution of the case. Further, the judgment is void since it was based on fraud. There has been both extrinsic and intrinsic fraud 2. "CPLR R5015(a)(3) provides that a party may be relieved of a judgement or order upon the ground of "fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party". " The fraud contemplated by CPLR R5015(a)(3) may be extrinsic or intrinsic. Citimortgage, Inc. v. Orichello, 5833/09, 2 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2011). matter." 3. "Extrinsic fraud ... deprives[s] a party from fully and fairly litigating a See Shaw v. Shaw, 97 AD2d 403 [2nd Dept. 1983]; see also Citimortgage, Inc. v. Orichello, 5833/09, 2 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2011). -1- 2 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 4. Allegations of extrinsic fraud do not require a moving party to establish a reasonable excuse for its default or a meritorious defense. See Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co. v. Gillio, 2009 NY Slip Op 50383U; 22 Misc 3d 1131 (A) [NY Sup. 2009]. 5. Conversely, intrinsic fraud generally concerns a fraudulent instrument or false representation and requires a moving party to demonstrate a meritorious defense and a reasonable excuse for its default. See Bank of New York v. Lagakos, 27 AD3d 678 [2nd Dept. 2006]. 6. Defendant contends that the plaintiff and plaintiff counsel's engaged in extrinsic fraud in the assignment of defendant's mortgage. Besides, extrinsic fraud was used to procure the foreclosure through Proof of Claim 5.1 in the Court Case No: 19-46591- judgment, Bankruptcy JMM. (Exhibit "A") The foregoing affected the prosecution of this case. 7. For proof of claim 5.1, Part 1, question 2 of Form 410, of the proof of claim alleged that the claim had not been acquired from someone else. Further, "U.S. Bank National Trust" Association as Legal Title Trustees for Truman 2016 SC6 Title averred that they are the Creditors. Truman further directed that any and all payments be directed to Fay Servicing LLC. Defendant avers that Truman is not a creditor because there was no privity of contract between the Defendant, on one hand, and Fay or the Howard Beach property servicer on the other hand. Defendant also maintains that Fay and the Howard Beach Property Servicer are not creditors buyer"' collectors" because they are "bulk debt or "debt as opposed to creditors. "holders" 8. Accordingly, Defendant contends that the there are no identifiable of the note as per the DOJ sentencing memorandum of June 3rd 2016. Besides, no party filed and/or presented any fact witness to prove their ownership of the original note, or chain of possession of the original note. -2- 3 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 9. The notes presented in the courts were invalid. The note presented for the Howard Beach Property was not properly assigned to US Bank Trust N.A. as Legal Title Trustee for Trust" Truman 2016 SC6 Title Trust ("Truman Trust") and neither "Truman nor Fay Servicing, are included as Plaintiff in the underlying foreclosure. The endorsement on the note is also ineffective because it appears to be a stamped signature (instead of a live signature) of a well- "robo-signer" documented for Countrywide Home Loans, Michele Sjolander. According to Michele Sjolander's testimony on January 25, 2012, in Kirby vs Bank of America, N.A. US Southern District of Mississippi, Hattiesburg case number 09-CV-00182-DCB-JMR, she worked for Recontrust and not Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. in 2007. (Exhibit "B") 10. Michele Sjolander further testified there were multiple stamps with her signature on them. She testified that while she had some sort of power of attorney to allow others to use her stamps, she did not know who the people using her stamp were, she was never in the same room where the stamps were being used and did not have the security clearance to be in the room where her multiple stamps were being used to endorsed notes. Therefore, she had no control of stamps with her signature or personal knowledge to endorse alleged original notes for a company she wasn't even employed by. Further, the redactions on the mortgage assignments and cover sheets are indicative of an attempt by the creditor's counsel to conceal identifying markings. "assignments" Many of the were not cross-referenced under the borrower's name or address. By redacting public information, i.e. Control recorder numbers and dates recorded, it would deter many from finding the actual recorded document for other valuable information. 11. It is also notable that the Pooling and Servicing Agreement does not convey "ownership" of the assets of the trust. It only conveys the revenue of that trust. Defendant further "certificates" asserts that there are no (and there has never been) any adduced in court as proof of -3- 4 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 possession of the original note. Only ledger entries in a computer were presented. It is also noteworthy that 99% of all notes were insured and paid off within the 90 days of default. 12. Defendant maintains that this Court should not turn a blind eye to the extensive fraud that Plaintiff and Plaintiff counsel's committed. It completely flies in the face of justice, for the courts to sanction blatant disregard of the law. As Defendant has shown above, the proceedings were based on constant lies as to the owner of the original note. False evidence was presented in that the original note was not presented to the court in support of the proof of claims bankruptcy court and the summons and complaint in this court. Besides, Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates admitted, in an unrelated case, to fraudulent firm practices in presenting foreclosure cases between 2009-2018 and were penalized by the court (in United States ex rel. Grubea v. Rosicki, Rosicki & Assocs., 12-cv-7199). (Exhibit "C") The judgment is void: the Plaintiff lacked the standing to bring the suit 13. CPLR 5015 (a)(4) authorizes a court to vacate a judgment "upon the ground of lack of jurisdiction to render the judgment. See Weinstock v. Citibank, 289 A.D.2d 326; Empire of Am. Realty Credit Corp. v. Smith, 227 A.D.2d 931, 932; Laurenzano v. Laurenzano, 222 A.D.2d 560, 560-561. 14. It is trite law that the plaintiff must prove it's standing in order to be entitled to relief. See Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A. v Mastropaolo, 42 AD3d 239, 242; TPZ Corp. v Dabbs, 25 AD3d 787, 789; see also Society of Plastics Indus. v County of Suffolk, 77 NY2d 761, 769). Standing requires an inquiry into whether a litigant has "an interest . . . in the lawsuit that the law request" will recognize as a sufficient predicate for determining the issue at the litigant's See Caprer v Nussbaum, 36 AD3d 176, 182; see New York State Assn. of Nurse Anesthetists v Nouello, 2 NY3d 207, 211; Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A. v Mastropaolo, 42 AD3d 239, 242). -4- 5 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 15. In a mortgage foreclosure action, a plaintiff has standing where it is both the holder and assignee of the subject mortgage and the holder or assignee of the underlying note at the time the action is commenced. See Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v Coakley, 41 AD3d 674; Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v Youkelsone, 303 AD2d 546, 546-547; First Trust Natl. Assn. v Meisels, 234 AD2d 414). 16. Either a written assignment of the underlying note or the physical delivery of the note prior to the commencement of the foreclosure action is sufficient to transfer the obligation, or the mortgage passes with the debt as an inseparable incident. See Weaver Hardware Co. v Solomovitz, 235 NY 321; Payne v Wilson, 74 NY 348, 354-355 [1878]; LaSalle Bank Natl. Assn. v Ahearn, 59 AD3d 911, 912; Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v Coakley, 41 AD3d at 674; Flyer v Sullivan, 284 App Div 697, 699. 17. In the instant case, the foreclosure proceedings started without following the disclosure requirements under UCC §§ 3-104 and 3-804. On or about April 09, 2009 Bank of America sent mortgage statement stating they are servicing the loan for the holder of the note, which they did not name. (Exhibit "D"). Furthermore, on January 05, 2010, BAC Home Loans, through its counsel, Rosicki, filed a foreclosure complaint with no note or assignments. (Exhibit "E") On January 20, 2010. Paramount Land, Inc., a company owned by one of the Partners of Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates (Rosicki") the foreclosing law firm entered an assignment of mortgage from MERS, as nominee for Countrywide Home Loans to BAC Home Loan Servicing LP dated October 29, 2009, but effective November 7, 2008 (Exhibit "F") On September 12, 2012, Bank of America sent a letter stating they had transferred servicing rights to Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (Exhibit "G") A year later, on October 10, 2012, Ocwen sent a letter stating the "Loan" had been transferred to BofA Merrill Lynch Asset Holdings, Inc. with Ocwen as its -5 - 6 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 servicer of the loan. In January 2014, an assignment of mortgage was recorded stating another transfer from Bank of America, NA to Christina Trust, a division of Willington Savings Fund " Society, FSB as trustee for ARLP Trust 3. (Exhibit H") Neither the plaintiff nor the plaintiff counsel provided any records of payments applied, charges applied, interest calculations, nothing to support the amount owed per the foreclosure complaint. In fact, no party since the foreclosure case has ever shown possession of the original April 24, 2007 in favor of Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. 18. Besides, a status conference was ordered June 04, 2014 with instructions for the Plaintiff counsel to present the wet-ink note on July 23, 2014. (Exhibit "I") Counsel for BAC Home Loan Servicing LP failed to comply with the term of the order to produce the note. Notably, the foreclosure court issued an order to dismiss the case Pre-Note. (Exhibit "J") 19. On or about August 2016, the Plaintiff counsel Dennis A. Amore of Clarfield, Okon, Salomone & Pincus. P.L. filed a Motion to Restore the case on the bases of "excusable default' for not complying with CPLR 5015. The motion was based on hearsay and lack of full disclosure. (Exhibit "K") On May 19, 2017, Fay Servicing, LLC the new alleged servicer claims the loan was sold, assigned, or transferred to Truman 2016 SC6 Title Trust (Exhibit "L") On June 30, 2017 the alleged attorney in fact for ARLP Trust recorded an assignment of mortgage on July 28., 2017 by Meridian Asset Servicer Inc., stating the loan was assigned from ARLP Trust 3 to Truman 2016 SC6 Trust. (Exhibit "M") On December 11, 2017, seven years after the original complaint was filed, Gross Polowy, LLC filed an alleged copy of the note. As the evidence presented there have been several entities claiming the note with few named in this case. It follows; the fact that there have been issues with the original note since the time this case started shows how Defendant's property rights stand to be violated by the illegal sale of the property. - 6 - 7 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 20. Further, the fraudulent proof of claim denied this court subject matter jurisdiction. The Plaintiff's lack of standing also denied the court personal jurisdiction. "[A] court is without power to render a judgment against a party over whom the court lacks jurisdiction. A judgment void" rendered without jurisdiction is (emphasis added) See Berlin v Sordillo, 179 AD2d 717, 719 ; see Diaz v Perez, 113 AD3d 421, 421; U S. Bank, N.A. v Bernhardt, 88 AD3d 871, 872. 21. As discussed above, the Court turned a blind eye to the fraud, amidst Defendant's unrelenting filings, which tried to bring the Court's attention to the fraud. The court further turned a blind eye to the fact that it lacked jurisdiction to hear and determine this case. CONCLUSION 22. For a long time now, Defendant has been subjected to a lot of harm as she tried to pursue justice and protect her property rights. Her children are also suffering from the costs and implications of endless litigation. Her suffering will be further aggravated by the sale of the said property following the illegal foreclosure. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court should issue an Order reversing its previous judgment issued on October 13, 2022, which Order Confirmed the Referee Report and Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale. Plaintiff further prays that this Court issues any other order it deems just. Dated: /f 7 Ashmeet Modikhan, In Pro Per - 7 - 8 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 02/09/2023 03:20 PM INDEX NO. 705854/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 76 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/09/2023 VERIFICATION I, Ashmeen Modikhan, a New York State Citizen and one of the People of New York, makes this Verification based on personal knowledge of matters set forth herein and appearing without waiving any rights or remedies, being competent in mind and body to testify, do hereby declare, verify and affirm that the facts stated herein are true, correct, and complete in all material fact, not misrepresented based on my own knowledge to the best of my current information, knowledge and belief under the penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States of America and the laws of New York , and is admissible as evidence in a court of law or equity, except as to those matters that are therein made upon information and belief, and as to those claims or facts, I believe them to be true and admissible as evidence, and if called upon as a witness, I will testify as to the veracity of my statements. Entered this day of rug , 20 Ashmeen Modikhan Se a l SUSAN LOUGHLIN - State of New York Notary Public No. 04LO6430887 Qualified in Queens County Elfglon Expires Maren 21, 20dle Printed Notar My commission expires - 8 - 9 of 165 FILED: QUEENS COUNT