Jogy !i

SUPREME COURT of FLORIDA AN-6 4s/yg i S=26

Thursday, December 27, 2013 4

CASE NO: SC13-1636

Lower Tribunal No (s): CASE NO.:4DA#13-1600

(Circuit Court Case No.: 50 2008 CA 032429XXXXMB

ANNIE MANTZ

Petitioner (s),

V,

U.S.BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION TRUSTEE FOR

AMERICA'S SERVICING COMPANY F/K/A WELLS FARGO HOME

MORTGAGE, INC

Respondent (s)

ON APPEAL FROM THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PETITIONER'S AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL INITIAL BRIEF

Re ectfully submitted,

8647 Crater Terrace Telephone: 561-768-3771

1

PETITIONER'S AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL INITIAL BRIEF

Table ofContents

Table ofCitations Page 1

Statement of the Case and Facts Page 2, 3, 4

Summary ofthe Argument Page 4, 5

Argument Page 5, 6

Issue 1: Whether the lower tribunal erred in denying the Defendant's Motions to Dismiss, Granting Relief to Plaintiff's from answering Defendant's Request for Admissions, Protective Order from Responding to Defendants' Request to Produce and First, Second and Third Interrogatories

Issue 2: Whether the lower tribunal erred in denying the Defendant the Granting Plaintiff's Final Judgment ofForeclosure with fraudulent note, Plaintiff's counsel and expert witness yelled out NO to Judge Kelley DIV AA, RM# 11A when Judge Kelley asked ifhe should admit Defendant's Trial Book as evidence in which they both knew the true account loan activity was in the Trial Book. PlaintiffWells Fargo was found guilty of Mortgage Servicing Fraud, Defendant received a check for $300 as settlement. The 4* DCA Dismissing the case, also Clerk rewording the Petitions ofPetitioner.

Conclusion Page 7, 8

Certificate ofFont Compliance Page 9

Certificate of Service Page 10

Table ofCitations Page 1

Downing v. First National Bank ofLake City, 81 So.2d 486 (Fla. 1955)

Your Construction Center, Inc. v. Gross, 316 So.2d 596 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)

Frost v. Regions Bank, 15 So. 3d 905 (Fla. 4* DCA 2009)

Kumar Corp. v. Nopal Lines Ltd, et al, 462 So.2d 1178 (Fla. 3d. DCA 1985)

Concoran v. Brody, 347 So.2d 689 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)

Fladell v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board, 772 So.2d 1240 (Fla. 2000)

Greenwald v. Triple D Properties, Inc. 424 So.2d 185, 187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)

Costa Bella Development Corp. v. Costa Development Corp, 411 So.2d 114 (Fla. 3d. DCA 1983)

Jeff-Ray Corp. v. Jacobson, 565 So.2d 885 (Fla. 4*DCA 1990)

WMSpecialty Mortgage, LLC v. Salomon, 874 So.2d 680 (Fla. 4* DCA 2004)

PETITIONER'S AMENDED JURISDICTIONAL INITIAL BRIEF

Statement ofthe Case and Facts

1. This is a Circuit Civil Case filed by the Plaintiff, US Bank National

Association Trustee for America's Servicing Company f/k/a Wells

Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc on Wednesday, October 15th, 2008.

2. Not a single supporting document was filed by the BANK, including

the very instrument upon which the BANK's case was grounded, the

note, mortgage allonge to note and assignments.

3. The BANK filed frivolous complaint.

4. There is no document attached to the Complaint that evidences the

BANK relationship to the original lender Plaintiff, US Bank National

Association Trustee for America's Servicing Company f/k/a Wells

Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc

5. No Florida case holds that a separate entity may maintain suit on a

note payable to another entity unless the requirements ofF.R.C.P.

1.210 are met. Concoran v. Brody, 347 So.2d 689 (Fla. 4th DCA

1977).

6. Florida Rules ofCivil Procedure, Rule 1.130

requires a BANK to attach copies ofall bonds, notes, bills of

exchange, contracts, accounts, or documents upon which action may

be brought to its complaint. The BANK failed to attach any document

that supports its complaint. Under Rules 1.140

(b)(6) and Rule 1.130(a) of the Florida Rules ofCivil Procedure, the

complaint should be dismissed for failure to attach a copy of the note

upon which the allegations are grounded. The BANK is not real party

in interest without an assignment of the mortgage and note (or other

evidence of a transfer ofownership), then such an assignment is one

of the documents upon which the complaint is filed under Rule

1.130(a), and therefore, must be attached.

7. Petitioner's Reinstatement ofmortgage where it states due on 7-1­

2008, Petitioner's automatic withdrawal of said mortgage payment

was withdrawn on 7-7-2008. Respondent's Default Letter to

Petitioner the same day Petitioner's mortgage payment was withdrawn

in the amount of $1054.53, this is not default, it is fraud!

3. The 4* DCA dismissed Petitioner case due to Petitioner not

complying, however, Petitioner complied three days prior to the due

date as Petitioner hand delivered it to the Clerk.

4. The 4* DCA reworded Petitioner's Petition to Show Cause and

replaced this on the Court Docket as a Petition for Rehearing,

Petitioner then filed a Notice ofAppeal going to the Supreme Court of

Florida.

Summary of the Argument

The lower tribunal court erred in denying all motions to dismiss.

The BANK's complaint fail to contain sufficient facts to establish who the

actual BANK is and its relationship to OWNERS and to action to foreclose a

mortgage The BANK is not a party to the note, mortgage and allonge to

note. There is no document attached to the Complaint that evidences the

BANK relationship to the original lender Plaintiff, US Bank National

Association Trustee for America's Servicing Company f/k/a Wells Fargo

Home Mortgage, Inc Until this burden is met, OWNERS are under no

obligation to prove any matter. . Florida Courts rests exclusively in those

persons granted by substantive law. the power to enforce the claim.. On the

face of the complaint and incorporated documents, the BANK is not real

party in interest The BANK fails to maintain any of the criteria's of the

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 1.210(a) which provides, in

pertinent part Every action may be prosecuted in the name of the real party in

interest, but a personal representative, administrator, guardian, trustee ofan

express trust, a party with whom or in whose name a contract has been made

for the benefit of another, or a party expressly authorized by statute may sue

in that person's own name without joining the party for whose benefit the

action is brought. Attached to the complaint is an alleged copy ofthe

mortgage which identifies. It is clear on the face of the complaint that a

person other then the BANK is the true owner of the mortgage

The note submitted shows that another party is the owner of the note. The

note makes no mention of the BANK When the exhibits conflict with the

allegations in the complaint, the exhibits supersede and negate the

allegations. The exhibits are inconsistent with the BANK's allegations of

material facts as to who the real party in interest is, such allegations

cancel each other out.

The BANK, pursuant to Florida Statutes § 57.011 as required by law, failed

to file Non-Resident cost bond as required and within the allowable time.

While the factual evidences favored OWNERS, the lower tribunal court

erroneously denied all motions to dismiss without due process, defense and

admitting highly relevant argument at the subject matter hearing.

Argument

The lower tribunal court erred on denying all motions to dismiss, i.e. Motion

to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Motion to Dismiss for

Lack of Standing. The lower tribunal court erred in granting Bank Final Judgment ofForeclosure.

The lower tribunal court erred on granting the Plaintiff's Motion to Strike or Dismiss Defendant's/ Plaintiff's Counterclaim.

The lower tribunal court erred in denying Defendant's Petition to have a Jury Trial as opposed to the Non-Jury Trial set by Plaintiff.

The Lower tribunal erred in not admitting Defendant's Trial Book into Evidence as the true loan activity, insurance, fraud case law, copy of settlement check for $300 from Wells Fargo class action suit found guilty of mortgage servicing fraud was contained in the book

Issue 1: Whether the lower tribunal erred in granting Defendant's dismissal

ofDefendant's Counterclaim against Plaintiff and striking Defendant jury

trial.

At the Hearing for Plaintiff's Motion to Strike or Dismiss Defendant's

Counterclaim asking Defendant who advised Defendant to file the

Counterclaim and it being granted to Plaintiff, Defendant feels the Lower

Tribunal Court erred.

Issue 2: Whether the lower tribunal erred in denying the Defendant the

Motions to Dismiss.

Defendant Filed Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

as the said note presented in the Lower Tribunal Court was a Fraud / Copy,

Plaintiffadmitted on 4-30-2013 the note was re-established, fraudulent

fabricated document in blue ink. Defendant feels the Court was in error.

Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing as this

Foreclosure Complaint was wrongfully filed, Defendant feels the lower

tribunal Court was in error.

Conclusion

The Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court reverse the Final

Judgment ofForeclosure, dismiss it with prejudice.

Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Plaintiffdid not

have the note they just re-established the note prior to the non-jury trial for

final judgment of foreclosure on 4-30-2013.

Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing as the Assignment ofMortgage is a

Fraud with a Bogus Notary and Asst. Secretary for MERS, a robo-signer!

Plaintiff's evaded Response to Defendant's Discovery either filing Motions

for Relief from Responding to Defendant's Request for Admissions, or

Protective Order from filing Defendant's Requests to Produce and from

answering Defendant's First Second and Third Set of Interrogatories.

Plaintiff's Motion to Strike or Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim was

granted to Plaintiffper Judge Diana Lewis on 4-22-2013. Hearing set by Co-

Counsel Kristin Johnson Gore from Carlton Fields Law Firm. Plaintiffdid

not comply with Court' pre-trial order stating both parties would exchange

Trial Books 20 days prior to the non-jury trial. Plaintiff's counsel, Steven

7

Rubino from Aldridge|Connors sent it out to Defendant on 5-1-2013, the

non-jury trial was on 4-30-2013.

The 4* DCA dismissed Petitioner case due to Petitioner not complying,

however, Petitioner complied three days prior to the due date as Petitioner

hand delivered it to the Clerk.The 4* DCA reworded Petitioner's Petition to

Show Cause and replaced this on the Court Docket as a Petition for

Rehearing, Petitioner then filed a Notice ofAppeal going to the Supreme

Court ofFlorida.

Certificate ofCompliance

I certify that the lettering in this brief is (Times New Roman 14-point Font or Courier New 12-point Font) and complies with the font requirements of Florida Rule ofAppellate Procedure 9.210(a)(2).

By A 4ÊF e Mantz, Pro-Se

o

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that a copy has been furnished to Steven Rubino, Esq, Aldridge Connors, LLP, 7000 West Palmetto Park Road, Suite 307, Boca Raton, FL 33433 on this 26* day ofDecember, 2013.

M Pr 8647 Crater Terrace Lake Park, FL 33403 561-768-3771

10

SUPREME COURT of FLORIDA

Thursday, December 27, 2013

CASE NO: SC13-1636

Lower Tribunal No (s): CASE NO.:4DA# 13-1600

(Circuit Court Case No.: 50 2008 CA 032429XXXXMB

ANNIE MANTZ

Petitioner (s),

V,

U.S.BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION TRUSTEE FOR

AMERICA'S SERVICING COMPANY F/K/A WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, INC

Respondent (s),

ON APPEAL FROM THE FOURTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PETITIONER'S APPENDIX

Respectfully submitted,

8647 Crater Terrace Telephone: 561-768-3771

1

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OFT$8TATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT, 1525 PALM BEACH LAE$SBLVD., WEST PALM

BEACH, FL 33401

August 15, 2013

CASE NO.: 4D13-1600 L.T. No.: 502008CA032429XX

ANNIE MANTZ v. US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS TRUSTEE

Appellant / Petitioner(s) Appellee / Respondent(s)

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

ORDERED that Appellant's "Objection to the 4* DCA Order to Dismiss the Case

for Failure to Comply with Court Order Dated August 1, 2013" filed August 5, 2013, is

treated as a motion for rehearing of the dismissal, and is hereby denied.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of the original court order.

Served:

cc: Michael K.Winston Dean A.Morande Aldridge & Connors, Up Rev.Annie Mantz

kb

couRTop

if BEUTTENMULLER, clerk Fomth District Court of Appeal