Preview
Filing # 85896452 E-Filed 03/05/2019 02:57:16 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION
CASE NO.
SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.
Plaintiff,
VS
VEROLA WILLIAMS A/K/A VEROLA
HOWARD WILLIAMS, et. al
Defendant(s),
NOTICE OF SUBMITTING FLA.STAT.§ 702.015(4) CERTIFICATION
Plaintiff, by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby submits contemporaneously
with the Complaint in this case the attached Certification of Possession pursuant to
Fla.Stat.§702.015(4)
ROBERTSON, ANSCHUTZ & SCHNEID, P.L.
Attorney for Plaintiff
6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100
Boca Raton, FL 33487
Telephone: 561-241-6901
“t
y
cacsimit 561-997-6909
ail: mail@rasflaw.com
“Melissa Konick, Esq., FL Bar No. 17569, Email Address: mkonick@rasflaw.com
K
Wendy Manswell, Esq., FL Bar No. 12027, Email Address: wmanswell@rasflaw.com
Rosemarie Wildman, Esq., FL Bar No, 645869, Email Address: rwildman@rasflaw.com
Gweneth Brimm, Esq., FL Bar No. 727601, Email Address: gbrimm@rasflaw.com
[ ] Shannon Dobel, Esq., FL Bar No. 126299, Email Address: sdobel@rasflaw.com
[ ] Alecia Daniel, Esq., FL Bar No. 36955, Email Address: adaniel@rasflaw.com
HIN UYATAT MIATA LV
18-209801
3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 1
CERTIFICATION GF POSSESSION PURSUANT TO FL. STAT, §762.015(4)
The_undersigned hereby certifies:
1 My name is Brandy Phalo and I am employed as an Original Documents Assistant in the
Original Document Department of Robertson, Anschutz & Schneid, P.L., Plaintiffs
counsel.
As reflected on the original promissory note, the note at issue and upon which this action
is brought was executed by VEROLA WILLIAMS AND LOU WILLIAMS on January
11, 2007.
I personally verified possession and location of the original note on September 19, 2018
at 03:49 PM.
As of the date and time of verification, the original note was located at Robertson,
Anschutz & Schneid, P.L., 6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100, Boca Raton, FL 33487.
Correct copies of the original note (and, if applicable, all endorsements, transfers,
allonges, loan modifications or assignments of the note) are attached hereto. Some
original allonges and/or indorsements may be affixed by stamp.
I give this statement based upon my own personal knowledge .
Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing and that the facts stated
in it are true.
Executed on September 19, 2018
Brandy Phalo
18-209801 - BrP
PAGE 2
3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 2
Le
Loan
+ :
?
NUMBER;
2 NOTE
°
01/11/07 TAMPA FL
(Datel (City) [State]
2005 E 23RD AVE, TAMPA , FL 32605-1929
[Property Address}
1, BORROWER'S PROMISE TO PAY
In return for a loan that] have received, I promise to pay U.S. $ 128,000.00 (this amount is called
" Principal"), plus interest, to the order of the Lender. ‘I ne Lender is BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
I will make all payments under this Note in the form of cash, check or money order.
T understand that the Lender may transfer this Note. The Lender or anyone who takes this Note by transfer and who
is entitled to receive payments under this Note is called the "Note Holder.”
2, INTEREST
Interest will be charged on unpaid principal until the full amount of Principal has been paid. I will pay interest at a
yearly rate of 6.125 %,
The interest rate required by this Section 2 is the rate I will pay both before and after any default described in Section
6(B) of this Note.
3. PAYMENTS
(A) Time and Place of Payments
I will pay pr'ncipal and interest by making a payment every month
1 will make my monthly payment on the 1ST day of each month beginning on MARCH 01, 2007
I will make these payments every month until I have paid all of the principal and interest and any other charges described
below that I may owe under this Note. Each monthly payment will be applied as of its scheduled due date and will be
applied to interest before Principal. If,on FEBRUARY 01, 2022 , I still owe amounts under
this Note, I will pay those amounts in full on that date, which is called the "Maturity Date."
I will make my monthly payments at BANK OF AMERICA, N.A,, P.O. BOX 17404, BALTIMGRE, MD
21297-1404 or at a different place if required by the Note Holder.
(B) Amount of Monthly Payments
My monthly payment will be in the amount of U.S. $ 1,088.80
4. BORROWER'S RIGHT TO PREPAY
| HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE PAYMENTS OF PRINCIPAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE THEY ARE DUE. ‘A PAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL ONLY 1S
KNOWN AS A "PREPAYMENT." WHEN | MAKE A PREPAYMENT, | WILL TELL THE NOTE HOLDER IN WRITING THAT | AM DOING SO. | MAY
NOT DESIGNATE A PAYMENT AS A PREPAYMENT IF | HAVE NOT MADE ALL THE MONTHLY PAYMENTS QUE UNDER THIS NOTE.
| MAY MAKE A FULL PREPAYMENT OR PARTIAL PREPAYMENT WITHOUT PAYING ANY PREPAYMENT CHARGE. AFTER PAYING ANY LATE
FEES OR OUTSTANDING FEES THAT | OWE, THE NOTE HOLDER WILL USE MY PREPAYMENTS TO REOUCE THE AMOUNT OF PRINCIPAL THAT |
OWE UNDER THIS NOTE. HOWEVER, THE NOTE HOLDER MAY APPLY MY PREPAYMENT TO THE ACCRUEO AND UNPAID INTEREST ON THE
PREPAYMENT AMOUNT BEFORE APPLYING MY PREPAYMENT TO RENUCE THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF THIS NOTE. IF | MAKE A PARTIAL
PREPAYMENT, THERE WILL BE NO CHANGES IN THE DUE DATES OR IN THE AMOUNT OF MY MONTHLY PAYMENT UNLESS THE NOTE HOLDER
AGREES IN WRITING TO THOSE CHANGES.
FLOR.WA FIXED FATE NOTE — Single Family
Page 1 of 3
BSSNIFL) 10100 VMP MORTGAGE FORMS - (800, 521-7291
ae
SRFL 01/11/07 7:28 ae
3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 3
—
=
.
‘ @
5: LOAN CHARGES
If a law, which applies to this loan and wich sets maximum Joan charges, is finally interpreted so that the interest
or other loan charges collected or to be collected in connection with this loan exceed the permitted limits, then: (a) any
such loan charge shall be redu by the amount necessary to reduce the charge to the permitted limit; and (b) any sums
already collec.sc from me w ch exceeded permitted limits will be refunded to me. The Note Holder may choose to
ake this refund by reducing tue cipal I owe under this Note or by making a direct payment to me. If a refund
reduces Principal, the reduction will be treated as a partial Prepayment.
6. BORROWER'S FAILURE TO PAY AS REQUIRED
(A) Late Ch-rge for Overdue Payments
If the Note Holder has not received the full amount of any monthly payment by the end of 15
calendar days after the date it is due, I will pay a late charge to the Note.Holder. The amount of the charge will be
5.0 % of my overdue payment of principal and interest. I will pay this late charge promptly but
only once on each late payment.
(B) Default
If 1 do not pay the full amount of each monthly payment on the date it is due, I will be in default,
(C) Notice of Default
If I am in default, the Note Holder may send me a written notice telling me that if I do not pay the overdue amount
by a certain date, the Note Holder may require me to pay immediately the full amount of Principal which has not been
paid and all the interest that | owe on that amount. That date must be at least 30 days after the date on which the notice
is mailed to me or delivered by other means.
(D) No Waiver By Note Holder
Even if, at a time when I am in default, the Note Holder does not require me to pay immediately in full as
described above, the Note Holder will still have the right to do so if | am in default at a later time.
(E) Payment of Note Holder’s Costs and Expenses
If the Note Holder has required me to pay immediately in full as described above, the Note Holder will have the
tight to be paid back by me for all of its costs and expenses in enforcing this Note to the extent not prohibited by
applicable law. Those expenses include, for example, reasonable attorneys’ fees.
7. GIVING OF NOTICES
Unless applicable law requires a different method, any notice that must be given to me under this Note will be
given by delivering it or by mailing it by first class mail to me at the Property Address above or at a different address if
I give the Note Holder a notice of my different address.
Any notice that must be given to the Note Holder under this Note will be given by delivering it or by mailing it by
first class mail to the Note Holder at the address stated in Section 3(A) above or at a different address if I am given a
notice of that different address.
8, OBLIGATIONS OF PERSONS UNDER THIS NOTE
If more than one person signs this Note, each person is fully and personally obligated to keep all of the promises
made in this Note, including the promise to pay the full amount owed. Any person who is a guarantor, surety or
endorser of this Note is also obligated to do these things. Any person who takes over these obligations, including the
obligations of a guarantor, surety or endorser of this Note, is also obligated to keep all of the promises made in this
Note. The Note Holder may enforce its rights under this Note against each person individually or against all of us
together. This means that any one of us may be required to pay all of the amounts owed under this Note.
9. WAIVERS
I and any other person who has obligations under this Note waive the rights of Presentment and Notice of
Dishonor. "Presentment" means the right to require the Note Holder to demand payment of amounts due. "Notice of
Dishonor" means the right to require the Note Holder to give notice to other persons that amounts due have not been
paid.
10. UNIFORM SECURED NO "E
Th’s Note is a uniform inst-ument with limited ~ ariaticns in some jurisdicti * In aadition 10 th; .otections
given to the Note Holder under xis Note, a Mortgage, Deed of Trust, ur Security Dead (the "Security Instrumen? ",
dated the sane date -~ this Note, prote ts the Note Holder from ressible tosses which ‘nigh. resuit if I do not keep the
BSSNIFL) (0101) Page 2 of 3
SRFL 01/41/07 7:28 aa
3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 4
r
:
e
qo
e-
va
thie promises which ! make in this Note, That Security Instrument describes how and under what conditions I may be
required to make immediate payment in full of all amounts I owe under this Note. Some of those conditions read as
follows:
If ail or any part of the Property or any Interest in the Property is sold or transferred (or if Borrower is
not a natural person and a beneficial interes? in Borrower is sold or transferred) without Lender's prior written
consent, Lender may require immiediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument.
However, this cotion shall not be exercised by Leuder if such exercise is prohibited by Applicable Law.
If Tender ezercises this option, Lender shali give Borrower notice of acceleration. The notice shall
provide a period of not less than 30 days from the date the notice is given in accordance with Section 15 within
which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Security Instrument. If Borrower fails to pay these sums
prior to the expiration of this period, Lender may invoke any remedies permitted by this Security Instrument
without further notice or demand on Borrower.
It, DOCUMENTA TAX
The state documentary tax due on this Note has been paid on the mortgage securing this indebtedness,
4 Qernal—
WITNESS THE DS. ) N. (D SEAL(S) OF THE UNDERSIGNED.
J [-107 (Seal)
cou wiki U/ ~Borrower
Co Ag
| TlI-6 (Seal)
veROLLAW TAMS. PAY TO THE ORDER OF -Borrower
WITHOUTRECOURSE (Seal)
Barkof America, NA. ~Borrower
HRISTINA M. SCHMITT (Seal)
ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT -Borrower.
(Seal)
-Borrower
(Seal)
~Borrower
(Seal)
~Borrower
(Seal)
-Borrower
(Sign Original Only)
BS5NIFL) 10101) Page 3 of 3
SRFL 01/11/07 7:28 a
3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 5
OPTIONAL BORROWERS PROTECTION PLAN® ADDENDUM ("ADDENDUM")
Borrower(s):
Account Number
LOU E WILLIAMS
VEROLA WILLIAMS
Note or Request Date: JANUARY 11TH, 2007 “Note Date" Principal Amount of
Loan Agreement or Amount Advanced or Transfe1 tred under the Fixed Rate Loan
Confirmation: $ 1 28,000.00
128,000.00
IMPORTANT INFORN: (TION ABOUT BANK OF AMERICA’S
BORROWERS PROTECTION PLAN
This Product is Optional. Your purchase of Borrowers Protection Plan is optional. Whether or not you
purchase Borrowers Protection Plan will not affect your application for credit or the terms of any existing
credit agreement you have with Bank of America,
Termination of Borrowers Protection Plan: You have the tight to cancel Borrowers Protection
Plan at
any time by making a wiiiten request. Bank of America has the right to cancel Borrowers Protection
Plan
upon sixty (60) days notice to you.
Borrowers Protection Plan will automatically terminate in the following circumstances:
1, Any monthly fee remaining unpaid ninety (90) days afte: its due date,
Your loan is charged off to profit and loss.
3. Your loan is paid off or refinanced.
4. Your loan and its servicing is transferred to an unaffiliated lender.
5. The expiration date (final scheduled payment due date) of your loan is reached, or 120 months
of
protection, whichever comes first.
Amount of Fee: The monthly Fee for the selected Borrowers Protection Plan option is £ N/A
TE you were to pay this monthly Fee for the duration of your loan term or the 120-month maximum
term
of Borrowers Protection Plan, whichever is less, the total Borrowers Protection Plan
fee would be
$ NIA
Eligibi ity Requirements, Conditions and Exclusions: There are eligibility requirements, conditions
and exclusions that could prevent you from receiving benefits under Borrowers Protection Plan.
You may find a complete explanation of eli bility requirements, conditions and exclusions in the
following portions of the Borrowers Protection Plan Addendum:
For Disability prot-ction, refer to Section II; paragraph a, paragraph b, paragraph c and paragraph d
For Unempl loyment protection, refer to Section III; paragraph a, paragraph b, paragraph c and
parageaph d.
For Accidepfaj’ Death protection, refer to Section IV; paragraph a, paragraph b, paragraph c and
paragraph
The nds Borrow
ef
gu
\\ \
P-e
VEROLLA WILL
\ Page 2 must also be completed and signed py all b srrowers.
BA442 som Page tof
MP Mortgage Solutions, Ine. (8001521-7291
_ Bae OW 11/07 7:28 A
J
fectronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 6
Tniti Monthly Monthly
Below Selected Protection Single Benefit | Monthly! Fee as a Payment Total
'setection | Options |
or Join: Period Fee * Perc ntage of (inctudes BPP Fee*
Option Option principal and Fee)*
Selected. i interest
Ch | Single 12 Nos 34.46 5.000 % $1,143.24 $6,532.60)
| Disability & t
Ee | Accidental Death i foint 12 wos. 87.10 aoe % s 1175.80) $10,452.00
——|C Tnvoluatary Single 32 MOS 59.88 500 $1,148.68 S. 7,185.60
Unemployment é&
|e Accidental Death Joint 12 wos s 108.88 10. 900 $1,197.68 $ 13,065.60
——|Cs Disability. Single 12 NOS 97.98 000 $1,186.79 $11,758.80
Involuntary
——|« Unemployment & Joint 12 wos 163.32 6 000 81,252.12 § 19,598.40
Accidental Death
[lo Decline Protection| 12 Was. 00 000 00 -00
(Options I and 2, refer to sections I, I aad IV for specific details pertaining these options.
Options 3 and 4, refer to sections I, III and IV for specific details pertaining toto these options.
Options 5 and 6, refer to sections I, II, IH and IV for specific details pertaining to these options.
If protection is declined, there is no amendment to the Note.)
The above Protection will be provided subject to the terms of this Addendum. Protection
will
expire on . The Protection is optional and not required to obtain
this loan or fixed rate option, and is not a factor in evaluating your application, Each Borrower
has read and agreed to the terms of this Addendum.
“If the Note is for a variable or adjustable rate loan, the Monthly Fee and
Monthly Payment
shown above are based upon the initial 10,452.00
(is Involuntary Single 12 MOS Is 59.88 5.500 S 1,148.68 8 7,185.60
Unemployment &
[sa Accidental Death Joint 12 wos 8 108.88 10.000 $1, 197.68 § 13,065.60
(Js Disability, Single 12 MOS s 97.99 9.000 81,186.79 $11,756.80)
Involuntary
— Cj6 Unemployment & Joint 12 MOS s 163.32 15.000 $1,252.12 § 19,598.40
Accidental Death
Decline Protection| 12 wos 00 7000 700 00
(Options | and 2, refer to sections I, Il and IV for specific details pertaining to these options.
Options 3 and 4, refer to sections I, III and IV for specific details pertaining to these options.
Options 5 and 6, refer to sections I, II, If and IV for specific details pertaining to these options.
If protection is declined, there is no amendment to the Note.)
The above Protection will be provided subject to the terms.of this Addendum. Protection will
expire on . The Protection is optional and not required to obtain
this loan or fixed rate option, and is not a factor in evaluating your application, Each Borrower
has read and agreed to the terms of this Addendum.
“If the Note is for a variable or adjustable rate loan, the Monthly Fee and Monthly Payment
shuvwn above are based upon the initial monthly payment of principal and interest as shown on
the Note, and both amounts are subject to change as described in the Note and this Addendum.
The total fee for Protection is an estimate based upon the first 120 monthly payments of
principal and interest as shown on your Note.
After reviewing the above information about Borrowers Protection Plan, having full opportunity to read
the Addendum and ask questions, I/we make the following choice:
[-] We elect single Protection for the Borrower listed below (Applicable for options 1, 3 and 5
only).
We elect joint Protection for the two Borrowers listed below (Applicable for options 2, 4 or 6
only).
A
go
Thott
se any Protection on this loan. (Applicable to Option 0).
§ZN
HON TANS
BA642 wos00 Page 2 of @
sra2 01/11/07 7:23
3/5/2019 val PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 9
Related Content
in Hillsborough County
Ruling
PATRICK MALLOY, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL. VS CAREY HELLMAN
Jul 30, 2024 |
23STCV25326
Case Number:
23STCV25326
Hearing Date:
July 30, 2024
Dept:
56
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
PATRICK MOLLOY, etc., et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
CAREY HELLMAN, etc., et al.,
Defendants.
CASE NO.: 231STCV25326
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:
DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
Date: July 30, 2024
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Dept. 56
MOVING PARTY: Defendant Carey Hellman dba Hellman Associates (Hellman)
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiffs
The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers.
BACKGROUND
This action was filed on October 17, 2023 and arises out of construction work performed by Defendant Hellman on Plaintiffs duplex (the Project).
The proposal for the Project was presented by Hellman to Plaintiffs on December 10, 2022. (Complaint, para. 6.)
Hellman performed work on the Project from January 6 to April, 2023.
(Complaint, para. 12.)
Plaintiffs allege that After some of [the allegedly deficient work] came to light, [Plaintiffs] learned that Hellmans contractors license with the Contractors State License Board (CSLB) was inactive or had lapsed.
They further discovered that some of the subcontractors Hellman hired for the work were also not licensed.
(Complaint, para. 16.)
The Complaint alleges causes of action for Breach of Implied-In-Fact Contract; 2) Negligence; 3) Breach of Implied Warranty; 4) Disgorgement Per Bus. & Prof. Code (B&PC) §7031; 5) Unfair Business Practices Per B&PC § 17200,
et seq.
; and 6) Fraud.
All of these causes of action rely, among other things, on Plaintiffs allegation that Hellman was an unlicensed contractor at the time he performed work on the Project.
On December 22, 2023, Defendant Hellman filed his demurrer to the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Causes of Action of the Complaint.
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
Defendants Request for Judicial Notice of a copy of a Contractors License naming Hellman and dated January 1982 is DENIED.
This is not an official record of the status of Hellmans license at the time of his work on the Project.
The Court does, however, accept the Declaration of Christopher L. Mass, Esq. in Support of Opposition to Demurrer (Mass Decl.), which provides the foundation for the record of the status of Hellmans contractors license since November 1, 2009.
This document evidences that Defendants license was not active during the period of time that Defendant was working on the Project.
DISCUSSION
Legal Standard
Legal Standard for Demurrer
[A] demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the allegations in a complaint. (
Lewis v. Safeway, Inc.
(2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 385, 388.) A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (See
Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co.
(2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994 [in ruling on a demurrer, a court may not consider declarations, matters not subject to judicial notice, or documents not accepted for the truth of their contents].) For purposes of ruling on a demurrer, all facts pleaded in a complaint are assumed to be true, but the reviewing court does not assume the truth of conclusions of law. (
Aubry v. Tri-City Hosp. Dist.
(1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 967.)
Analysis for Demurrer
Fourth Cause of Action
Defendant alleges that Plaintiffs Fifth Cause of Action for Disgorgement is not a valid cause of action because it is based on the allegation that Defendant was not licensed while working on the Project, whereas Defendant possessed a contractors license during the entire construction project.
Defendants purported evidence of his initial licensure in 1983 does not, however, support his contention that he was actively licensed when he worked on the Project.
[1]
The evidence supplied by the Mass Declaration shows that Defendant was not actively licensed during his work on the Project.
Defendants Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of Action of the Complaint is therefore OVERRULED.
Fifth Cause of Action
Defendants Demurrer to the Fifth Cause of Action for violation of the B&PC Section 17200 for Unfair Business Practices depends upon his position that he was not in violation of the CSLB rules for contractor licensing at the time he performed work on the Project.
As indicated above, the Court does not accept Defendants position that he was licensed throughout his work on the Project.
Even if he were so licensed, which apparently he was not, the allegation that his subcontractors were also not licensed would provide all necessary support for an Unfair Business Practices claim. (Complaint, para. 16.)
Defendants Demurrer to the Fifth Cause of Action of the Complaint is therefore OVERRULED.
Sixth Cause of Action
Defendants Demurrer to the Sixth Cause of Action for Fraud is also based upon the premise that Defendant was properly licensed throughout the time he worked on the Project.
Defendant has not established that this is the case and, for that reason, the Demurrer to the Sixth Cause of Action is OVERRULED.
Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.
If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.
Dated this 30th day of July 2024
Hon. Holly J. Fujie
Judge of the Superior Court
[1]
Although the Demurrer makes a reference to the one year statute of limitations for claims under B&PC Section 7031, Defendant worked on the Project from January through April of 2023 and this action was filed on October 17, 2023 well within any one year statute of limitations.
Ruling
MARIA PADILLA, ET AL. VS JOSEPH HEFFESSE, ET AL.
Jul 29, 2024 |
23STCV15942
Case Number:
23STCV15942
Hearing Date:
July 29, 2024
Dept:
53
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles Central District
Department 53
maria padilla
, et al.;
Plaintiffs
,
vs.
joseph heffesse,
as trustee of the Coldwater Canyon Trust
, et al.;
Defendants
.
Case No.:
23STCV15942
Hearing Date:
July 29, 2024
Time:
10:00 a.m.
[tentative] Order
RE:
petition for approval of compromise of claim for minor claimant anthony jayden diaz
MOVING PARTY:
Petitioner Jeanette Oliveros
RESPONDING PARTY:
Unopposed
Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim for Minor Claimant Anthony Jayden Diaz
The court considered the moving papers filed in connection with this petition.
No opposition papers were filed.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff and petitioner Jeanette Oliveros (Petitioner) seeks court approval of the settlement made on behalf of minor claimant Anthony Jayden Diaz (Minor Claimant) in this action.
The compromise of a minors disputed claim for damages is valid only after it has been approved, upon the filing of a petition, by the court.¿ (Prob. Code, § 3500.)¿ The petition must be verified by the petitioner, must contain a full disclosure of all information that has any bearing upon the reasonableness of the compromise, and must be prepared on Judicial Council form MC-350.¿ (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.950.)¿
Defendants Joseph Heffesse, as trustee of the Coldwater Canyon Trust, Sandra B. Sternberg Heffesse, and LA Properties Heffesse LLC have agreed to pay a total of $175,000 to settle this action, of which $5,000 will be separately allocated to Minor Claimant.
(MC-350, ¶¶ 10-11.)
Of the $5,000 allocated to Minor Claimant, $1,250 will be paid to counsel for attorneys fees and $134.35 will be paid to counsel for legal costs.
(MC-350, ¶¶ 13, 16.)
The remaining $3,615.65 will be paid or delivered to the parent of Minor Claimant, i.e., Petitioner, without bond, on the terms and under the conditions specified in Probate Code sections 3401-3402.
(MC-350, ¶ 18, subd. (b)(5); MC-350, Attachment 18b(5), Oliveros Decl., ¶¶ 1-2, 6; Prob. Code, §§ 3401, 3402.)
The court has reviewed the petition and finds the settlement to be fair and reasonable, and in the best interest of Minor Claimant.
The court further finds that the declaration of Rachel Fishenfeld is sufficient to support the request for attorneys fees in the amount of $1,250 (representing 25 percent of the $5,000 settlement).
(Fishenfeld Decl., ¶¶ 2-3, 6-11; Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 7.955.)
The court therefore grants Petitioners petition.
ORDER
The court grants petitioner Jeanette Oliveross petition for approval of compromise of claim on behalf of minor claimant Anthony Jayden Diaz.
The court orders that the $3,615.65 settlement on behalf of minor claimant Anthony Jayden Diaz may be paid to plaintiff and petitioner Jeanette Oliveros pursuant to Probate Code sections 3401 and 3402.
The court orders petitioner Jeanette Oliveros to give notice of this ruling.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
July 29, 2024
_____________________________
Robert B. Broadbelt III
Judge of the Superior Court
Ruling
AHLUWALIA, NIRMAL KUMAR vs KHACHO, ESAM
Jul 28, 2024 |
CV-22-003529
CV-22-003529 – AHLUWALIA, NIRMAL KUMAR vs KHACHO, ESAM – Defendant and Cross-Complainant Esam Khacho’s Motion for Summary Judgment or Summary Adjudication – MOOT.
In view of the Court’s granting of Plaintiff’s Motion to be Relieved from Deemed Admissions, on which deemed admissions Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is founded, this motion is moot.
Ruling
Arturo Rodriguez vs. Ravdeep Singh
Jul 25, 2024 |
23CECG04769
Re: Arturo Rodriguez v. Ravdeep Singh
Superior Court Case No. 23CECG04769
Hearing Date: July 25, 2024 (Dept. 502)
Motion: Defendants’ Demurrer to the Complaint and Motion to Strike
Tentative Ruling:
To order the hearing off calendar, as no motion was filed for this hearing date, and
it does not appear any notice was given to plaintiff of this hearing.
Explanation:
Plaintiff filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings against defendants’ answer,
which was originally scheduled for March 28, 2024, but was continued to May 14, 2024,
to allow plaintiff to correct defects in his proof of service of the motion. His motion was
granted on May 14, 2024.
On May 10, 2024, defendants filed a memorandum of points and authorities and
four declarations in support of a demurrer, and these papers reflected a hearing date of
May 14, 2024. However, defendants had not calendared a hearing for a demurrer, and
instead were apparently attempting to use the date for plaintiff’s motion as a hearing
date for their own motion. When defendants appeared for oral argument at this hearing,
the court informed them that they did not have a motion on calendar, and they needed
to obtain a hearing date from the court’s Law and Motion desk before filing moving
papers.
After this, defendants obtained a hearing date, but they did not file any moving
papers for this hearing date. Perhaps defendants believed that the papers they filed on
May 10, 2024, served as the moving papers for the July 25th hearing. This is incorrect.
Those papers did not give plaintiff any notice of a hearing on July 25, 2024. Furthermore,
there is no Notice of Motion included with the papers filed on May 10, 2024. Nor is there
a proof of service of any moving papers on plaintiff for a hearing on July 25, 2024. The
statement in the Declaration of June Waara that she verbally informed plaintiff of the
hearing on July 25, 2024, does not make for service of the motion on plaintiff.
If defendants desire a hearing on a demurrer to the complaint, they must obtain
a hearing date from the Law and Motion clerk, and thereafter file moving papers
properly indicating the date they obtained, which show timely and proper service of the
motion on plaintiff. Even though defendants are self-represented, they are held to the
same standards as attorneys and they must follow the rules of civil procedure.
(Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 984-985.)
Also, the declaration of non-party June Waara filed on defendants’ behalf on July
12, 2024 indicates that she met and conferred with plaintiff regarding the demurrer, which
defendants are supposed to do. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41.) Ms. Waara’s status as a
licensed and bonded Unlawful Detainer Assistant and Process Server does not give her
any authority to meet and confer with plaintiff on defendants’ behalf. Ms. Waara should
take care not to practice law without a license.
Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), and Code of Civil Procedure
section 1019.5, subdivision (a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order
adopting this tentative ruling will serve as the order of the court and service by the clerk
will constitute notice of the order.
Tentative Ruling
Issued By: KCK on 07/23/24 .
(Judge’s initials) (Date)
Ruling
JASON KRISTAL VS. TRILION CAPITAL FUND, LLC ET AL
Jul 22, 2024 |
CGC24613604
Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for July 22, 2024 line 4. DEFENDANT TRILION CAPITAL FUND, LLC, TCF PROPERTIES, LLC, DAVID WEINER DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT is continued to August 15, 2024 for the moving party to provide a courtesy copy of the moving papers and reply no later than July 23, 2024 with a cover letter reflecting new hearing date. (Opposition received). =(501/CFH) Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849). Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required. Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified and the opposing party does not appear.
Ruling
MARSHALL vs SKYLINE DEVELOPMENT CO LLC
Jul 23, 2024 |
PSC1901112
Marshal v. Skyline
PSC1901112 Hearing on Motion to Tax Costs
Development Co LLC
Tentative Ruling:
This is a derivative action brought by certain homeowners in a planned community located in
Palm Springs, California. On February 13, 2019, Plaintiffs Gemma Marshall, Lynn Leskera, Mark
Matthews, Lori Matthews, Sandy Kaufman 4, and Dave Davidson, derivatively on behalf of
Pinnacle Owners Association, Inc. (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed their original “Member Derivative
Complaint” against Defendant Skyline Development Co. LLC (“Skyline”) for: (1) breach of
governing documents and (2) breach of fiduciary duty. After multiple demurrers and motions, on
January 3, 2023, Plaintiffs filed the operative Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) against
Defendants Skyline Development Co., LLC, Jennifer Roberts, and David Gilbert (together
3
That motion was originally scheduled to be heard on July 10, 2024, but pursuant to an ex parte request by Plaintiff
the matter was continued and is set to be heard on September 18, 2024.
4
At some point, Lawrence Lichter was substituted in as trustee of the Sanford Kaufman Living Trust.
“Defendants”). The TAC asserts causes of action for: (1) breach of governing documents and
violation of the Davis-Stirling Act (I); (2) breach of governing documents and violation of the Davis-
Stirling Act (II); (3) breach of fiduciary duty of board director; (4) breach of fiduciary duty of
controlling shareholder; and (5) breach of fiduciary duty (supplemental). Thereafter, a demurrer
to the breach of fiduciary duty cause of action was sustained.
On April 10, 2024, the parties attended a Mandatory Settlement Conference (“MSC”) with Judge
Tam Nomoto Schumann (Ret.). At the MSC, the parties entered into a settlement agreement that
was conditioned on the signing of a formal written agreement, pursuant to which, among other
things, the parties would be responsible for their own costs. Following the MSC, the parties
exchanged drafts of a written agreement, but due to the introduction of additional terms, the
settlement fell apart.
On April 15, 2024, Lichter filed a request for dismissal of his claims against Defendants, and the
dismissal was entered the same day. On April 24, 2024, Defendants filed a memorandum of costs
seeking the recovery of $14,536.20.
***
Lichter moves to strike the costs sought by Defendants. He argues that the parties reached a
settlement agreement at the MSC, under which the parties would bear their own fees and costs.
He relied on this agreement in dismissing his claims, and Defendants are acting in bad faith by
seeking to recover costs. He also argues that Plaintiffs are the ones who realized their litigation
goals in the settlement, so they should be deemed the prevailing party. Finally, he argues that
costs should not be awarded against him because it is a derivative action and his claims are the
same as those brought by the other Plaintiffs.
In opposition, Defendants argue that at the MSC (which Lichter did not attend in violation of a
court order 5), the parties reached a conditional settlement that would become final once
formalized in writing. They argue that the written agreement never happened, so there is no
settlement. Despite this, Lichter voluntarily dismissed his complaint as to all Defendants, making
them the prevailing party. Finally, they argue that Lichter does not dispute the appropriateness of
any of the costs sought, so the motion should be denied entirely.
In reply, Lichter argues that Defendants are not the prevailing parties and it would be inequitable
to award costs against him.
Analysis
Under C.C.P. §1032(b), unless otherwise provided, “a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of
right to recover costs in any action or proceeding.” C.C.P. §1032(a)(4) defines prevailing party as:
(1) party with a net monetary recovery; (2) a defendant who is dismissed; (3) a defendant where
neither plaintiff nor defendant recovers anything; and (4) a defendant as against those plaintiffs
who do not recover any relief against that defendant. (Ibid.) “If any party recovers other than
monetary relief and in situations other than as specified, the “prevailing party” shall be as
determined by the court, and under those circumstances, the court, in its discretion, may allow
costs or not and, if allowed, may apportion costs between the parties on the same or adverse
sides pursuant to rules adopted under Section 1034.” (Ibid.)
The court has no discretion in awarding fees if the moving party falls into one of the four categories
set forth in C.C.P. § 1032(a)(4). (Michell v. Olick (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 1194, 1198; see also,
Vons Cos., Inc. v. Lyle Parks Jr., Inc. (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 823, 832 [“absent statutory authority,
‘the court has no discretion to deny costs to the prevailing party’”][citation omitted].) Additionally,
when a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses a complaint, the defendant is the prevailing party. (Santisas
5
Lichter was, however, represented by counsel at the MSC.
v. Goodin (1998) 17 Cal.4th 599, 606.) “This is true … regardless of whether the dismissal is with
or without prejudice.” (Cano v. Glover (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 326, 331.)
In the present case, Lichter dismissed the action against Defendants. While he claims the parties
agreed that each party would bear their own costs, any such agreement was never formalized. 6
Accordingly, Defendants are the prevailing parties as to Lichter and are entitled to their costs.
Defendants seek to recover costs totaling $14,536.20.
C.C.P. § 1033.5(a) contains a list of items specifically allowed as recoverable costs, and §
1033.5(b) contains a list of items that “are not allowable as costs, except when expressly
authorized by law.” An item neither specifically allowable under subdivision (a) nor prohibited
under subdivision (b) may be allowed or denied in the discretion of the court if certain
requirements are satisfied. (C.C.P. § 1033.5(c)(4).) In particular, the item “shall be reasonably
necessary to the conduct of the litigation rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its
preparation” and “shall be reasonable in amount.” (C.C.P. § 1033.5(c)(2) and (3).) Objection to
any item or items on the cost memorandum may be made by filing and serving a noticed motion
to tax cost. (C.C.P. § 1034; CRC 3.1700 (b)(1).)
If the items appearing in a cost bill appear to be proper charges, the burden is on the party seeking
to tax costs to show that they were not reasonable or necessary. (Ladas v. California State
Automotive Assoc. (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761, 773-774.) “A verified memorandum of costs is
prima facie evidence of their propriety,” and the opposing party has the burden to demonstrate
that they are not proper. (Jones v. Dumrichob (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 1258, 1266.) A verified
memorandum does not require copies of bills, invoices or other documentation to be attached.
(Id. at 1267.) If the items are properly objected to, they are put in issue and the burden of proof is
on the party claiming them as costs. (Ladas, supra, 19 Cal.App.4th at 774.)
Here, Defendants filed a verified memorandum of costs. The costs sought (for filing and motion
fees, deposition costs, service of process, court reporter fees, and a discovery referee) appear to
be proper charges, and Lichter has not challenged any specific cost. Accordingly, Defendants are
awarded costs totaling $14,536.20.
Ruling:
Deny the motion. Award costs to Defendants in the amount of $14,536.20 to be paid by Lichter.
6
If Lichter contends the dismissal was erroneously filed, he can seek to vacate the dismissal.
Ruling
VEGA VS GAGNI
Jul 19, 2024 |
MSC19-02639
MSC19-02639
CASE NAME: VEGA VS GAGNI
HEARING ON DEMURRER TO: BAY AREA ESCROW DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S S.A.C FILED BY BAY
AREA ESCROW SERVICES
FILED BY:
*TENTATIVE RULING:*
Introduction
Before the Court is Defendant Bay Area Escrow Services (“Bay Area Escrow”)’ Demurrer. The
Demurrer relates to Plaintiff Roman Vega (“Vega”)’s Complaint for five contract and fraud related
causes of action.
For the following reasons, the Demurrer is sustained with leave to amend. Plaintiff Roman Vega
shall have until August 8, 2024 to amend.
Meet and Confer Requirement
On February 7, 2024, Defendant’s counsel and Plaintiff’s counsel met and conferred over the
telephone regarding Defendant’s intent to file a demurrer and Defendant’s counsel sent an email to
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CA
DEPARTMENT 2 SITTING IN 18
JUDICIAL OFFICER: GINA DASHMAN
HEARING DATE: 07/19/2024
Plaintiff’s counsel with a summary of their conversation. (Rood Decl. at ¶¶ 3-4.) Mr. Rood requested
more time to consider the issues and on February 20, 2024, Mr. Rood sent an email to Defendant’s
counsel stating that he expects Defendant to file a demurrer. (Rood Decl. at ¶¶ 6-7.) Thus,
Defendant’s meet and confer requirement has been satisfied.
The Second Amended Complaint
Defendant Joly Gagni is a real estate investor who purchased 1341 Rosemary Lane in Concord (the
Property) with the intent to remodel and sell it. (SAC ¶ 2.) Title to the Property was taken in the name
of Sierra Capital Investments, LLC, which was owned and operated by Gagni. (¶ 2.) Gagni added
plaintiff Roman Vega as an LLC member for the purchase of the Property and solicited funds from
Vega for the down payment. (¶¶ 2-3.)
Vega provided $80,000 as initial funds for the purchase of the Property. (¶ 4.) The parties agreed that
Vega would be reimbursed this amount from the net proceeds of the sale of the Property, and the
rest of the proceeds would be split evenly between them. (¶ 4.)
Under the agreement, Gagni was required to supervise and fund the remodeling of the Property,
which she failed to do. (¶ 5.) Vega was required to invest additional funds for the remodeling. (¶ 5.)
As the property was being offered for sale, Gagni attempted to take all the net proceeds for herself.
(¶ 6.) In response, Vega filed this action and recorded a lis pendens. (¶ 6.) The parties agreed the lis
pendens would be withdrawn, allowing for the Property to be sold, while the sale proceeds remained
in an escrow opened with Bay Area Escrow. (¶ 6.) Net proceeds in the amount of $76,579.04 were to
be retained by Bay Area Escrow, pending a written agreement of the parties or a judgment. (¶ 6.)
Vega alleges that Bay Area Escrow was required to retain the sale proceeds in escrow and could not
act on any request to disburse the funds unless all parties agreed in writing. Vega alleges Bay Area
Escrow breached its contract with the parties and committed negligence when it allowed Gagni to
unilaterally withdraw the funds from escrow. (¶ 7.)
Vega filed the original complaint naming Gagni and Sierra Capital Investments on December 18, 2019.
Vega executed the subject escrow instructions on December 20, 2019. Vega amended his complaint
to name Bay Area Escrow on August 15, 2023. The parties stipulated to the filing of the second
amended complaint (SAC). Bay Area Escrow then filed this demurrer to SAC claiming that Vega’s
causes of action for negligence and breach of contract are barred by a one-year limitations period in
the escrow instructions. Vega filed a notice of non-opposition to the demurrer and requesting leave
to amend. Bay Area Escrow filed a reply in which it objected to Vega’s request to amend, claiming
Vega had not met his burden to show the defect in the statute of limitations could be cured by
amendment.
Legal Standard
“The function of a demurrer is to test the sufficiency of the complaint as a matter of law.” (Holiday
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CA
DEPARTMENT 2 SITTING IN 18
JUDICIAL OFFICER: GINA DASHMAN
HEARING DATE: 07/19/2024
Matinee, Inc. v. Rambus, Inc. (2004) 118 Cal. App. 4th 1413, 1420.) A complaint “is sufficient if it
alleges ultimate rather than evidentiary facts” (Doe v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 42 Cal. 4th 531, 550),
but the plaintiff must set forth the essential facts of his or her case “with reasonable precision and
with particularity sufficient to acquaint [the] defendant with the nature, source and extent” of the
plaintiff’s claim. (Doheny Park Terrace Homeowners Assn., Inc. v. Truck Ins. Exchange (2005) 132 Cal.
App. 4th 1076, 1099.) Legal conclusions are insufficient. (Id. at 1098–1099; Doe at 551, fn. 5.) The
Court “assume[s] the truth of the allegations in the complaint but do[es] not assume the truth of
contentions, deductions, or conclusions of law.” (California Logistics, Inc. v. State of California (2008)
161 Cal. App. 4th 242, 247.)
Analysis
The escrow instructions attached to the SAC provide for a one-year contractual limitations period
from the close of escrow.
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS: the instructions contained in these general provisions and any
supplemental instructions shall be construed and interpreted according to California law. NO
ACTION SHALL LIE AGAINST ESCROW HOLDER FOR ANY CLAIMS, LOSSES, LIABILITY OR
ALLEGED CAUSE OF ACTION OF ANY KIND OR NATURE WHATSOEVER, HOWEVER CAUSED OR
OCCURRED IN THIS ESCROW TRANSACTION OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE HANDLING OR
PROCESSING OF THIS ESCROW TRANSACTION, UNLESS BROUGHT WITHIN TWELVE 12
MONTHS AFTER THE CLOSE OF ESCROW OR ANY CANCELLATION OR TERMINATION OF
ESCROW FOR ANY REASON WHATSOEVER.
(SAC Ex. D, ¶ 13.)
Bay Area Escrow argues the escrow closed no later than June 8, 2021 because this is the date the new
owners of the Property recorded their deed. As Vega did not file this lawsuit until August 15, 2023,
Bay Area Escrow claims that all causes of action in the complaint are time-barred.
"A demurrer based on a statute of limitations will not lie where the action may be, but is not
necessarily, barred. [Citation.] In order for the bar of the statute of limitations to be [] raised by
demurrer, the defect must clearly and affirmatively appear on the face of the complaint; it is not
enough that the complaint shows that the action may be barred." (Guardian N. Bay, Inc. v. Superior
Ct. (2001) 94 Cal. App. 4th 963.)
Here, no defect in the statute of limitations appears on the face of the SAC or any judicially noticeable
matter. Bay Area Escrow provides a Lexis Nexis printout purporting to show that escrow closed by
June 8, 2021, which is the date the new owners of the Property recorded their deed. (See Def.’s RJN,
Exh. 1.) This document is extrinsic to the SAC and not the proper subject of judicial notice under
Evidence Code section 452(d).
As a result, the Court might have found that Bay Area Escrow was limited to making its objection by
answer under CCP section 430.30(b). However, Vega has specifically requested leave to amend the
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTINEZ, CA
DEPARTMENT 2 SITTING IN 18
JUDICIAL OFFICER: GINA DASHMAN
HEARING DATE: 07/19/2024
SAC to address the issues raised in the demurrer. While Vega did not meet their burden by failing to
show how the defects in the SAC can be cured (Reply at p. 2: 19-25), “[L]iberality in permitting
amendment is the rule, if a fair opportunity to correct any defect has not been given." (Angie M. v.
Superior Court (1995) 37 Cal. App. 4th 1217, 1227.) When the Complaint, liberally construed, can
state a cause of action under any theory or there is a reasonable possibility that amendment could
cure the defect, it is an abuse of discretion for a judge to deny leave to amend. (JP Morgan Chase
Bank, N.A. v Ward (2019) 33 Cal. App. 5th 678, 684.) If Vega has not had an opportunity to amend the
Complaint in response Demurrer, leave to amend should be liberally allowed as a matter of fairness,
unless the Complaint shows on its face that it cannot be amended. (City of Stockton v Superior Court
(2007) 42 Cal. App. 4th 730, 747; Align Technol. Inc. v Tran (2009) 27 Cal. App. 4th 197, 216.)
Accordingly, Vega’s request to amend is granted.
Ruling
HAUT vs BUSH
Jul 24, 2024 |
CVRI2401221
MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION
CVRI2401221 HAUT VS BUSH
BY KEVIN BUSH, SEABOARD INC.
Tentative Ruling: Grant motion to compel arbitration and stay action as to these Defendants
pending completion of arbitration.
Preview
Filing # 85896452 E-Filed 03/05/2019 02:57:16 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION CASE NO. SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC. Plaintiff, VS VEROLA WILLIAMS A/K/A VEROLA HOWARD WILLIAMS, et. al Defendant(s), NOTICE OF SUBMITTING FLA.STAT.§ 702.015(4) CERTIFICATION Plaintiff, by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby submits contemporaneously with the Complaint in this case the attached Certification of Possession pursuant to Fla.Stat.§702.015(4) ROBERTSON, ANSCHUTZ & SCHNEID, P.L. Attorney for Plaintiff 6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100 Boca Raton, FL 33487 Telephone: 561-241-6901 “t y cacsimit 561-997-6909 ail: mail@rasflaw.com “Melissa Konick, Esq., FL Bar No. 17569, Email Address: mkonick@rasflaw.com K Wendy Manswell, Esq., FL Bar No. 12027, Email Address: wmanswell@rasflaw.com Rosemarie Wildman, Esq., FL Bar No, 645869, Email Address: rwildman@rasflaw.com Gweneth Brimm, Esq., FL Bar No. 727601, Email Address: gbrimm@rasflaw.com [ ] Shannon Dobel, Esq., FL Bar No. 126299, Email Address: sdobel@rasflaw.com [ ] Alecia Daniel, Esq., FL Bar No. 36955, Email Address: adaniel@rasflaw.com HIN UYATAT MIATA LV 18-209801 3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 1 CERTIFICATION GF POSSESSION PURSUANT TO FL. STAT, §762.015(4) The_undersigned hereby certifies: 1 My name is Brandy Phalo and I am employed as an Original Documents Assistant in the Original Document Department of Robertson, Anschutz & Schneid, P.L., Plaintiffs counsel. As reflected on the original promissory note, the note at issue and upon which this action is brought was executed by VEROLA WILLIAMS AND LOU WILLIAMS on January 11, 2007. I personally verified possession and location of the original note on September 19, 2018 at 03:49 PM. As of the date and time of verification, the original note was located at Robertson, Anschutz & Schneid, P.L., 6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100, Boca Raton, FL 33487. Correct copies of the original note (and, if applicable, all endorsements, transfers, allonges, loan modifications or assignments of the note) are attached hereto. Some original allonges and/or indorsements may be affixed by stamp. I give this statement based upon my own personal knowledge . Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing and that the facts stated in it are true. Executed on September 19, 2018 Brandy Phalo 18-209801 - BrP PAGE 2 3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 2 Le Loan + : ? NUMBER; 2 NOTE ° 01/11/07 TAMPA FL (Datel (City) [State] 2005 E 23RD AVE, TAMPA , FL 32605-1929 [Property Address} 1, BORROWER'S PROMISE TO PAY In return for a loan that] have received, I promise to pay U.S. $ 128,000.00 (this amount is called " Principal"), plus interest, to the order of the Lender. ‘I ne Lender is BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. I will make all payments under this Note in the form of cash, check or money order. T understand that the Lender may transfer this Note. The Lender or anyone who takes this Note by transfer and who is entitled to receive payments under this Note is called the "Note Holder.” 2, INTEREST Interest will be charged on unpaid principal until the full amount of Principal has been paid. I will pay interest at a yearly rate of 6.125 %, The interest rate required by this Section 2 is the rate I will pay both before and after any default described in Section 6(B) of this Note. 3. PAYMENTS (A) Time and Place of Payments I will pay pr'ncipal and interest by making a payment every month 1 will make my monthly payment on the 1ST day of each month beginning on MARCH 01, 2007 I will make these payments every month until I have paid all of the principal and interest and any other charges described below that I may owe under this Note. Each monthly payment will be applied as of its scheduled due date and will be applied to interest before Principal. If,on FEBRUARY 01, 2022 , I still owe amounts under this Note, I will pay those amounts in full on that date, which is called the "Maturity Date." I will make my monthly payments at BANK OF AMERICA, N.A,, P.O. BOX 17404, BALTIMGRE, MD 21297-1404 or at a different place if required by the Note Holder. (B) Amount of Monthly Payments My monthly payment will be in the amount of U.S. $ 1,088.80 4. BORROWER'S RIGHT TO PREPAY | HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE PAYMENTS OF PRINCIPAL AT ANY TIME BEFORE THEY ARE DUE. ‘A PAYMENT OF PRINCIPAL ONLY 1S KNOWN AS A "PREPAYMENT." WHEN | MAKE A PREPAYMENT, | WILL TELL THE NOTE HOLDER IN WRITING THAT | AM DOING SO. | MAY NOT DESIGNATE A PAYMENT AS A PREPAYMENT IF | HAVE NOT MADE ALL THE MONTHLY PAYMENTS QUE UNDER THIS NOTE. | MAY MAKE A FULL PREPAYMENT OR PARTIAL PREPAYMENT WITHOUT PAYING ANY PREPAYMENT CHARGE. AFTER PAYING ANY LATE FEES OR OUTSTANDING FEES THAT | OWE, THE NOTE HOLDER WILL USE MY PREPAYMENTS TO REOUCE THE AMOUNT OF PRINCIPAL THAT | OWE UNDER THIS NOTE. HOWEVER, THE NOTE HOLDER MAY APPLY MY PREPAYMENT TO THE ACCRUEO AND UNPAID INTEREST ON THE PREPAYMENT AMOUNT BEFORE APPLYING MY PREPAYMENT TO RENUCE THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF THIS NOTE. IF | MAKE A PARTIAL PREPAYMENT, THERE WILL BE NO CHANGES IN THE DUE DATES OR IN THE AMOUNT OF MY MONTHLY PAYMENT UNLESS THE NOTE HOLDER AGREES IN WRITING TO THOSE CHANGES. FLOR.WA FIXED FATE NOTE — Single Family Page 1 of 3 BSSNIFL) 10100 VMP MORTGAGE FORMS - (800, 521-7291 ae SRFL 01/11/07 7:28 ae 3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 3 — = . ‘ @ 5: LOAN CHARGES If a law, which applies to this loan and wich sets maximum Joan charges, is finally interpreted so that the interest or other loan charges collected or to be collected in connection with this loan exceed the permitted limits, then: (a) any such loan charge shall be redu by the amount necessary to reduce the charge to the permitted limit; and (b) any sums already collec.sc from me w ch exceeded permitted limits will be refunded to me. The Note Holder may choose to ake this refund by reducing tue cipal I owe under this Note or by making a direct payment to me. If a refund reduces Principal, the reduction will be treated as a partial Prepayment. 6. BORROWER'S FAILURE TO PAY AS REQUIRED (A) Late Ch-rge for Overdue Payments If the Note Holder has not received the full amount of any monthly payment by the end of 15 calendar days after the date it is due, I will pay a late charge to the Note.Holder. The amount of the charge will be 5.0 % of my overdue payment of principal and interest. I will pay this late charge promptly but only once on each late payment. (B) Default If 1 do not pay the full amount of each monthly payment on the date it is due, I will be in default, (C) Notice of Default If I am in default, the Note Holder may send me a written notice telling me that if I do not pay the overdue amount by a certain date, the Note Holder may require me to pay immediately the full amount of Principal which has not been paid and all the interest that | owe on that amount. That date must be at least 30 days after the date on which the notice is mailed to me or delivered by other means. (D) No Waiver By Note Holder Even if, at a time when I am in default, the Note Holder does not require me to pay immediately in full as described above, the Note Holder will still have the right to do so if | am in default at a later time. (E) Payment of Note Holder’s Costs and Expenses If the Note Holder has required me to pay immediately in full as described above, the Note Holder will have the tight to be paid back by me for all of its costs and expenses in enforcing this Note to the extent not prohibited by applicable law. Those expenses include, for example, reasonable attorneys’ fees. 7. GIVING OF NOTICES Unless applicable law requires a different method, any notice that must be given to me under this Note will be given by delivering it or by mailing it by first class mail to me at the Property Address above or at a different address if I give the Note Holder a notice of my different address. Any notice that must be given to the Note Holder under this Note will be given by delivering it or by mailing it by first class mail to the Note Holder at the address stated in Section 3(A) above or at a different address if I am given a notice of that different address. 8, OBLIGATIONS OF PERSONS UNDER THIS NOTE If more than one person signs this Note, each person is fully and personally obligated to keep all of the promises made in this Note, including the promise to pay the full amount owed. Any person who is a guarantor, surety or endorser of this Note is also obligated to do these things. Any person who takes over these obligations, including the obligations of a guarantor, surety or endorser of this Note, is also obligated to keep all of the promises made in this Note. The Note Holder may enforce its rights under this Note against each person individually or against all of us together. This means that any one of us may be required to pay all of the amounts owed under this Note. 9. WAIVERS I and any other person who has obligations under this Note waive the rights of Presentment and Notice of Dishonor. "Presentment" means the right to require the Note Holder to demand payment of amounts due. "Notice of Dishonor" means the right to require the Note Holder to give notice to other persons that amounts due have not been paid. 10. UNIFORM SECURED NO "E Th’s Note is a uniform inst-ument with limited ~ ariaticns in some jurisdicti * In aadition 10 th; .otections given to the Note Holder under xis Note, a Mortgage, Deed of Trust, ur Security Dead (the "Security Instrumen? ", dated the sane date -~ this Note, prote ts the Note Holder from ressible tosses which ‘nigh. resuit if I do not keep the BSSNIFL) (0101) Page 2 of 3 SRFL 01/41/07 7:28 aa 3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 4 r : e qo e- va thie promises which ! make in this Note, That Security Instrument describes how and under what conditions I may be required to make immediate payment in full of all amounts I owe under this Note. Some of those conditions read as follows: If ail or any part of the Property or any Interest in the Property is sold or transferred (or if Borrower is not a natural person and a beneficial interes? in Borrower is sold or transferred) without Lender's prior written consent, Lender may require immiediate payment in full of all sums secured by this Security Instrument. However, this cotion shall not be exercised by Leuder if such exercise is prohibited by Applicable Law. If Tender ezercises this option, Lender shali give Borrower notice of acceleration. The notice shall provide a period of not less than 30 days from the date the notice is given in accordance with Section 15 within which Borrower must pay all sums secured by this Security Instrument. If Borrower fails to pay these sums prior to the expiration of this period, Lender may invoke any remedies permitted by this Security Instrument without further notice or demand on Borrower. It, DOCUMENTA TAX The state documentary tax due on this Note has been paid on the mortgage securing this indebtedness, 4 Qernal— WITNESS THE DS. ) N. (D SEAL(S) OF THE UNDERSIGNED. J [-107 (Seal) cou wiki U/ ~Borrower Co Ag | TlI-6 (Seal) veROLLAW TAMS. PAY TO THE ORDER OF -Borrower WITHOUTRECOURSE (Seal) Barkof America, NA. ~Borrower HRISTINA M. SCHMITT (Seal) ASSISTANT VICE PRESIDENT -Borrower. (Seal) -Borrower (Seal) ~Borrower (Seal) ~Borrower (Seal) -Borrower (Sign Original Only) BS5NIFL) 10101) Page 3 of 3 SRFL 01/11/07 7:28 a 3/5/2019 2:57 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 5 OPTIONAL BORROWERS PROTECTION PLAN® ADDENDUM ("ADDENDUM") Borrower(s): Account Number LOU E WILLIAMS VEROLA WILLIAMS Note or Request Date: JANUARY 11TH, 2007 “Note Date" Principal Amount of Loan Agreement or Amount Advanced or Transfe1 tred under the Fixed Rate Loan Confirmation: $ 1 28,000.00 128,000.00 IMPORTANT INFORN: (TION ABOUT BANK OF AMERICA’S BORROWERS PROTECTION PLAN This Product is Optional. Your purchase of Borrowers Protection Plan is optional. Whether or not you purchase Borrowers Protection Plan will not affect your application for credit or the terms of any existing credit agreement you have with Bank of America, Termination of Borrowers Protection Plan: You have the tight to cancel Borrowers Protection Plan at any time by making a wiiiten request. Bank of America has the right to cancel Borrowers Protection Plan upon sixty (60) days notice to you. Borrowers Protection Plan will automatically terminate in the following circumstances: 1, Any monthly fee remaining unpaid ninety (90) days afte: its due date, Your loan is charged off to profit and loss. 3. Your loan is paid off or refinanced. 4. Your loan and its servicing is transferred to an unaffiliated lender. 5. The expiration date (final scheduled payment due date) of your loan is reached, or 120 months of protection, whichever comes first. Amount of Fee: The monthly Fee for the selected Borrowers Protection Plan option is £ N/A TE you were to pay this monthly Fee for the duration of your loan term or the 120-month maximum term of Borrowers Protection Plan, whichever is less, the total Borrowers Protection Plan fee would be $ NIA Eligibi ity Requirements, Conditions and Exclusions: There are eligibility requirements, conditions and exclusions that could prevent you from receiving benefits under Borrowers Protection Plan. You may find a complete explanation of eli bility requirements, conditions and exclusions in the following portions of the Borrowers Protection Plan Addendum: For Disability prot-ction, refer to Section II; paragraph a, paragraph b, paragraph c and paragraph d For Unempl loyment protection, refer to Section III; paragraph a, paragraph b, paragraph c and parageaph d. For Accidepfaj’ Death protection, refer to Section IV; paragraph a, paragraph b, paragraph c and paragraph The nds Borrow ef gu \\ \ P-e VEROLLA WILL \ Page 2 must also be completed and signed py all b srrowers. BA442 som Page tof MP Mortgage Solutions, Ine. (8001521-7291 _ Bae OW 11/07 7:28 A J fectronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 6 Tniti Monthly Monthly Below Selected Protection Single Benefit | Monthly! Fee as a Payment Total 'setection | Options | or Join: Period Fee * Perc ntage of (inctudes BPP Fee* Option Option principal and Fee)* Selected. i interest Ch | Single 12 Nos 34.46 5.000 % $1,143.24 $6,532.60) | Disability & t Ee | Accidental Death i foint 12 wos. 87.10 aoe % s 1175.80) $10,452.00 ——|C Tnvoluatary Single 32 MOS 59.88 500 $1,148.68 S. 7,185.60 Unemployment é& |e Accidental Death Joint 12 wos s 108.88 10. 900 $1,197.68 $ 13,065.60 ——|Cs Disability. Single 12 NOS 97.98 000 $1,186.79 $11,758.80 Involuntary ——|« Unemployment & Joint 12 wos 163.32 6 000 81,252.12 § 19,598.40 Accidental Death [lo Decline Protection| 12 Was. 00 000 00 -00 (Options I and 2, refer to sections I, I aad IV for specific details pertaining these options. Options 3 and 4, refer to sections I, III and IV for specific details pertaining toto these options. Options 5 and 6, refer to sections I, II, IH and IV for specific details pertaining to these options. If protection is declined, there is no amendment to the Note.) The above Protection will be provided subject to the terms of this Addendum. Protection will expire on . The Protection is optional and not required to obtain this loan or fixed rate option, and is not a factor in evaluating your application, Each Borrower has read and agreed to the terms of this Addendum. “If the Note is for a variable or adjustable rate loan, the Monthly Fee and Monthly Payment shown above are based upon the initial 10,452.00 (is Involuntary Single 12 MOS Is 59.88 5.500 S 1,148.68 8 7,185.60 Unemployment & [sa Accidental Death Joint 12 wos 8 108.88 10.000 $1, 197.68 § 13,065.60 (Js Disability, Single 12 MOS s 97.99 9.000 81,186.79 $11,756.80) Involuntary — Cj6 Unemployment & Joint 12 MOS s 163.32 15.000 $1,252.12 § 19,598.40 Accidental Death Decline Protection| 12 wos 00 7000 700 00 (Options | and 2, refer to sections I, Il and IV for specific details pertaining to these options. Options 3 and 4, refer to sections I, III and IV for specific details pertaining to these options. Options 5 and 6, refer to sections I, II, If and IV for specific details pertaining to these options. If protection is declined, there is no amendment to the Note.) The above Protection will be provided subject to the terms.of this Addendum. Protection will expire on . The Protection is optional and not required to obtain this loan or fixed rate option, and is not a factor in evaluating your application, Each Borrower has read and agreed to the terms of this Addendum. “If the Note is for a variable or adjustable rate loan, the Monthly Fee and Monthly Payment shuvwn above are based upon the initial monthly payment of principal and interest as shown on the Note, and both amounts are subject to change as described in the Note and this Addendum. The total fee for Protection is an estimate based upon the first 120 monthly payments of principal and interest as shown on your Note. After reviewing the above information about Borrowers Protection Plan, having full opportunity to read the Addendum and ask questions, I/we make the following choice: [-] We elect single Protection for the Borrower listed below (Applicable for options 1, 3 and 5 only). We elect joint Protection for the two Borrowers listed below (Applicable for options 2, 4 or 6 only). A go Thott se any Protection on this loan. (Applicable to Option 0). §ZN HON TANS BA642 wos00 Page 2 of @ sra2 01/11/07 7:23 3/5/2019 val PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County/13th Judicial Circuit Page 9