See: https://livinglies.wordpress.com/2018/01/18/live-at-3pm-pacific-the-west-coast-foreclosure-show-fraudulent-indorsement/ Judges are increasingly discounting fraudulent endorsements that appear out of nowhere, seemingly to “perfect” the right to foreclose. Judgments are often based on erroneous conclusions especially when the Bank fails to prove the chain of title back to the original lender, who is often defunct. If the entity that endorsed the note didn’t exist when the note was indorsed- it is void. In Deutsche Bank v. Burke, the judge refuses to allow Duetche one more chance, ruling “the banks request for a do-over is denied.” “?From the very beginning of trial, Deutsche Bank’s counsel was on notice that if it wanted to introduce its version of the Note indorsed in blank, some proof of authentication would be necessary. Deutsche Bank never offered such proof at trial.?….?” Deutsche Bank asked to reopen the trial record to provide “the wet ink original of the Note or testimony affirming Deutsche Bank’s status as holder of the Note.” It is likely the endorsement would have simply been added. Charles Marshall: email: cmarshall@marshallestatelaw.com Phone 619.807.2628 Investigator Bill Paatalo: BP Investigative Agency Email: info.bpia@gmail.com Office: 406-328-4075
