IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL …docshare01.docshare.tips/files/3670/36703974.pdf · 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112, on this 31st day of August, 2010

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA

BANKUNITED, as [purported] successor in interest to [SEIZED] BANKUNITED, FSB.,

purported “plaintiff”, vs. DISPOSED CASE NO.: 09-6016-CA JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, et al. ___________________________________________________________________________/

J. FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S OBJECTION TO ANY magistrate, R. 1.490

1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Jennifer Franklin Prescott does not consent and

objected to any referral to any magistrate, hearing officer, and/or “special master”, Rule

1.490, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S OBJECTIONS TO ANY magistrate

2. In particular, J. Franklin Prescott objects and did not consent to any magistrate

a. findings of fact; b. conclusions of law.

MEMORANDUM

“A REFERRAL TO A MAGISTRATE REQUIRES THE CONSENT OF ALL PARTIES.” JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT IS ENTITLED TO HAVE THIS MATTER HEARD BY A JUDGE AND DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE THIS MATTER HEARD BY ANY MAGISTRATE. JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT FILE A WRITTEN OBJECTION TO FICTITIOUS referral PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF THE HEARING.

Here, no hearing can possibly commence.

PUBLICLY RECORDED 08/12/2010 FINAL DISPOSITION

3. On 08/12/2010, Def. Judge Hugh D. Hayes disposed of the fraudulent action.

NO order of referral

4. Here, there were

2

a. 08/12/2010 Final Disposition; b. No order of referral; c. No notice of any hearing; d. J. Franklin Prescott’s non-consent and objection to any magistrate referral and hearing.

RECORD LACK OF note and mortgage

5. Here, in the recorded absence of any note and/or mortgage, there was

a. No agreement; b. No debt; c. No lien; d. No BankUnited interest.

LACK OF NOTICE OF ANY hearing

6. Court staff asserted and published:

“A party/attorney scheduling a hearing must concurrently notice the matter in conformance with the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and ensure timely notice is served on all pro se parties and counsel of record in advance of the hearing. The original notice must be timely filed with the Clerk of Court. The Judges’ and Magistrates ask that no courtesy copies be sent to their offices on foreclosure cases only. The setting party/attorney is responsible for preparing and filing the Order of Referral pursuant to Rule 1.490, Fl. Civil Rules of Court (also can be found at www.ca.cjis20.org/web/main/magistrates as a reference, no more signed Order of Referrals from the above website will be accepted). You will be required to submit your proposed Order of Referral to the appropriate Judge for each hearing in front of the Magistrate. This will include all hearings for 10, 15 or 30 minutes and Special Set hearings. (This will also include any Summary/Default Judgment hearings requesting more than 5 minutes.)”

Here, no notice was served on Jennifer Franklin Prescott. Here, nothing, no matter, and no

hearing were noticed in violation of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

BANKUNITED, FSB’S LACK OF standing

7. Pursuant to § 48.23, Fla. Stat.,

3

“1. A notice of lis pendens must contain the following: a. The names of the parties.”

Here, the fraudulent notice of lis pendens “contained” “BankUnited, FSB”. However here,

said BankUnited was not any note/mortgage holder or party. Here, U.S. agents had seized

BankUnited, FSB.

8. Furthermore here, Jennifer Franklin-Prescott was mischaracterized as a “married woman”

and “Walter Prescott” as “her husband”. However here, “Walter Prescott” is not the

“husband” of Jennifer Franklin Prescott. Here, the notice of lis pendens did not contain the

parties’ names.

NO jurisdiction

9. Here, “BankUnited, FSB” was

a. Not any party; b. Had no interest; c. Had no standing.

Here, bankrupt BankUnited, FSB, had no standing, and this Court has no jurisdiction.

RECORD APPEAL - NO jurisdiction

10. Here after disposition and Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s Notice of Appeal, this Court had no

jurisdiction:

NOTICE OF RELEASE & DISCHARGE OF FRAUDULENT lis pendens, CH. 48, F.S.

11. The fraudulent notice of lis pendens, purported INSTR 4318185, Collier County Records,

has been released and discharged. Here admittedly, no note or mortgage could be

4

established, Ch. 48, 71, F. S. Purported Plaintiff bankrupt BankUnited failed and was

seized. In the record absence of any note or mortgage, said seized bank’s fraudulent action

and notice were null & void and did not operate as a lis pendens, Ch. 48.

12. Furthermore, a lis pendens is not effectual for any purpose beyond 1 year from the

commencement of the action and expires, § 48.23, Florida Statutes.

13. Here, the pleadings conclusively proved that no action could be founded on any lost and/or

destroyed note and/or instrument. Therefore, the bankrupt and seized bank’s non-

meritorious action not possibly affect the subject property, and the court controlled and

discharged the fraudulent notice of lis pendens, § 48.23, Fla. Stat. The Docket showed the

08/12/2010 Final Disposition by Def. Judge Hugh D. Hayes.

08/12/2010 FINAL DISPOSITION, FLA.R.CIV.P. 1.998 14. Hereby, prevailing Jennifer Franklin Prescott filed the Final Disposition Form pursuant to

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.998, 25.075, Florida Statutes. The Docket evidenced

Judge Hugh D. Hayes’ 08/12/2010 Final Disposition before any hearing.

15. Here, the Docket and official record alterations were

a. Arbitrary and capricious; b. Unlawful.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND PUBLICATION

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above has been furnished to the

purported non-plaintiff, James E. Albertelli, Erin Quinn Rose, and Erin Rowland, Albertelli Law,

P.O. Box 23028, Tampa, FL 33623, and Defendant Judge Hugh D. Hayes, Naples Courthouse,

3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112, on this 31st day of August, 2010.

The pleading is also being published worldwide.

________________________ /s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott, Prevailing Victim of seized BankUnited’s record fraud

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA

BANKUNITED, as [purported] successor in interest to [SEIZED] BANKUNITED, FSB.,

Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO.: 09-6016-CA JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, et al.

NOTICE OF APPEAL, DISPOSITION, AND BANKRUPT BANKUNITED’S SEIZURE

___________________________________________________________________________/

COUNSEL, ALBERTELLI LAW, SERVICE NOTICE OF

NOTICE OF APPEAL AND DISPOSITION IN FAVOR OF J. FRANKLIN PRESCOTT

BANKRUPT BANK SEIZURE INFORMATION AND § 673.3011, FLA. STAT.,

EVIDENCE OF NO entitlement to enforce non-existent instrument

DISPOSITION NOTICE IN FAVOR OF JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT

PURSUANT TO UNIFORM COMMERICAL CODE, AND U.C.C., ART. 3,

AND FLORIDA LAW

NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM ALTERATIONS OF RECORD

1. Jennifer Franklin Prescott, who was never served, hereby appeals from

a. The unlawful alteration of the official documents, records, and Case Docket;

b. The lack of any record of the purported “disposition” in Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s

favor in the Case File;

2

c. The lack of any record of the dismissal in Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s favor;

d. The absence of the FINAL DISPOSITION FORM, § 25.075, Florida Statutes, and

Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.998, from the Case File;

e. The lack of any record, reason, and/or explanation of the publicly recorded removal of

the August 2010 “complaint” in the Case File;

f. The absence of any record, reason, and explanation of the publicly recorded removal of

the August 2010 “summons” from the Case File;

g. The lack of any transparency, accountability, due process, and equal protection of law;

h. The record lack of any mortgage or note in this facially fraudulent and frivolous action;

i. The lack of any record of the removal of ALFRED CAMNER, Esq., and the CAMNER

LIPSITZ law firm and its Attorneys from the mock proceedings;

j. The record lack of the means of final disposition before any hearing.

RECORD ABSENCE OF FINAL DISPOSITION FORM, § 25.075, FLA. STAT.

2. Jennifer Franklin Prescott could not find the Final Disposition Form, Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.998, in

the Case File on Tuesday, August 17, 2010. See § 25.075, Florida Statutes.

ABSENCE OF DISMISSAL IN JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S FAVOR

3. On Tuesday, August 17, 2010, Jennifer Franklin Prescott could not find the Dismissal in

Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s favor in the Case File.

DEFENDANT JUDGE HUGH D. HAYES SUBSTITUTED COUNSEL ON 08/18/2010

4. On August 18, 2010, Defendant Judge Hayes substituted Counsel, and BILL McCOLLUM,

ATTORNEY GENERAL, and Shelley B. Cridlin, Fla. Bar No. 0022451, made an

appearance as counsel for Defendant Judge Hugh D. Hayes, in place of any and all prior

counsel in Federal Case 2:2009-cv-00791.

3

FALSIFICATIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS APPARENT 5. Jennifer Franklin Prescott reported Case File demand and/or review in the Clerk of Court’s

Office on August 12, 13, and 16, and 17, 2010. While the electronic Docket showed

a. “disposition”;

b. “complaint”; and

c. “summons”,

none could be ascertained and/or verified in the Naples Courthouse.

DEMANDS FOR CLARIFICATION AND EVIDENCE

6. On Monday, August 16, AM, and Tuesday, August 17, 2010, PM, at the Naples Courthouse,

Jennifer Franklin Prescott demanded to see the Case File evidence of:

a. “disposition”;

b. “complaint”; and

c. “summons” in this fraudulent action.

DEFENDANT JUDGE’S ASSISTANT ASSERTED MISTAKE/ERROR

7. Defendant Hayes’ Judicial Assistant, Jan, stated to Jennifer Franklin Prescott that

a. NO “August 2010 complaint”, and

b. NO “August 2010 summons”

appeared in the Case File.

NO negotiable instrument UNDER GOVERNING CODE

8. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), Article 3, governs Negotiable Instruments.

Pursuant to § 3-104. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, no “negotiable instrument” existed,

and no promise or order to pay a fixed amount of money and interest existed in this

fraudulent action. Bankrupt and seized Bankunited was unable to prove any right to

4

enforce the admittedly non-existent purported “instrument”. Here, the Court may not enter

judgment in favor of seized and bankrupt Bankunited. See UCC, Article 3. Here, the Court

must enter judgment in favor of Jennifer Franklin Prescott. WHEREFORE, Jennifer

Franklin Prescott, who was not served and does not submit to any jurisdiction, moves this

Court to declare the purported action fraudulent and a fraud on the Court, and enter

judgment of dismissal in favor of Jennifer Franklin Prescott.

JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT HOLDS FREE & CLEAR RECORD TITLE

9. Jennifer Franklin Prescott holds unencumbered record title to the subject protected

homestead real property. See Collier County Public Records.

PURPORTED “DISPOSITION” 10. The Case Docket stated “disposition”:

The purported “disposition date” was “08/12/2010”.

RULE 1.540, FLA. R. CIV. P.

11. Rule 1.540(a), Fla.R.Civ.P., authorizes the court to correct mistakes in a judgment. Here,

purported “disposition” appeared on the official Docket. Here there were no note, no

entitlement to enforce the admittedly lost/destroyed note, no service, no hearing, and no

due process. Here, records were altered.

BANKUNITED VIOLATED CH. 49, FLA. STAT.

5

12. Seized and bankrupt Bankunited violated Ch. 49, Fla. Stat., for illegal purposes of

defrauding Jennifer Franklin Prescott and perpetrating fraud on this Court. In this

fraudulent Case, service by publication was not allowed:

49.011 Service of process by publication; cases in which allowed. 49.021 Service of process by publication, upon whom. 49.031 Sworn statement as condition precedent. 49.041 Sworn statement, natural person as defendant. 49.051 Sworn statement, corporation as defendant. 49.061 Sworn statement, parties doing business under a corporate name as defendants. 49.071 Sworn statement, unknown parties as defendants. 49.08 Notice of action, form. 49.09 Notice of action, return day. 49.10 Notice of action, publication, proof. 49.11 Notice of action, posting, proof. 49.12 Mailing of notice of action.

RECORD PERJURY 13. The record and Case File showed perjury by, e.g., Nicholas Krancher. See Exhibits on file.

PURPORTED “SUMMONS”

14. Purportedly, a summons was issued, “ELSA JARERO”, who is not any known party to this

fraudulent action. The summons disappeared from the record without any explanation.

PURPORTED “COMPLAINT”

15. A “complaint” appeared on the Docket.

Pursuant to Rule 1.190, Fla.R.Civ.P., the Court had never granted any leave. The summons

disappeared from the record without any explanation.

PURPORTED plaintiff HAD NO right to enforce FICTITIOUS note

16. Seized and bankrupt BankUnited was not entitled to enforce a fictitious note. Here,

BankUnited was not any holder of any note or mortgage at the time it filed suit or any time

6

thereafter. It is elementary that to be a holder, one must be in possession of the instrument.

See s. 673.3011, F.S. Here, BankUnited was not any proper party to file suit to foreclose a

fictitious un-delivered lost and/or destroyed instrument.

IMPOSSIBILITY OF ANY delivery

17. Under Florida law delivery is necessary to validate a negotiable instrument. A lost and/or

destroyed note or mortgage could not have possibly been delivered.

IMPOSSIBILITY OF ANY reestablishment

18. Here, the lost and/or destroyed note or mortgage could not have possibly been reestablished

pursuant to Ch. 71, Fla. Stat.

EMERGENCY AND THREAT OF FURTHER INJURY

19. Known foreclosure fraud is an EMERGENCY. Further injury must be prevented.

NO note – NO default

20. The purported plaintiff did not own or hold any note. No obligation existed. No “default”

could have possibly occurred. See also Uniform Commercial Code; Negotiable Instruments.

UNKNOWN LOSS OR DESTRUCTION

21. The bankrupt and seized “plaintiff” bank asserted that any “promissory note and mortgage

have been lost or destroyed and are not in the custody or control of Bankunited, and the time

and manner of the loss or destruction is unknown.” In this Case, Bankunited could not have

possibly reestablished any lost or destroyed note or mortgage.

CAMNER KNEW THAT reestablishment WAS IMPOSSIBLE, CH. 71, FLA. STAT.

22. In particular, Founder and Attorney Alfred Camner and his law firm knew that Bankunited

could not have possibly reestablished any lost or destroyed note or mortgage.

SEIZURE OF BANKRUPT BANKUNITED

7

23. On Thursday, May 21, 2009, BankUnited, FSB, Coral Gables, FL was seized by the Office

of Thrift Supervision (OTS), and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)

was named Receiver. Said seizure stripped away the main asset that belonged to the holding

company, BankUnited Financial Corp. Counsel Alfred Camner was the largest shareholder.

24. The June 22 Report by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Inspector

General (OIG) was critical of the bank’s management and Attorney and Founder Alfred

Camner. See Counsel, Camner Lipsitz law firm.

FAILURE & SEIZURE OF THE PURPORTED plaintiff

25. BankUnited, FSB’s failure in May 2009 cost the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp’s insurance

fund about $5.7 billion – the second most costly failure in FDIC history.

NO instrument, and NO lien

26. Here, there was neither any instrument nor any lien. No property was described.

NO interest, and NO successor in interest

27. Here, Bankunited, FSB, had no interest. Here, Bankunited was not and could not have

possibly been any successor in interest. No sum was due to the plaintiff bankrupt bank.

NO rights and NO standing

28. Here, Bankunited, just like Bankunited, FSB, had no rights and no standing.

NO conditions precedent – FACIALLY FRIVOLOUS action

29. Here, the conditions precedent to the institution of any foreclosure action did not occur and

could not have possibly occurred. Here on its face, the sham action was frivolous.

THE COURT KNEW THAT reestablishment WAS IMPOSSIBLE

30. Here as a matter of law, “reestablishment” was impossible. Here, the falsified “promissory

note and mortgage have been lost or destroyed and are not in the custody or control of

8

Bankunited, and the time and manner of the loss or destruction is unknown.” See Ch. 71,

Fla. Stat.

31. Here, Jennifer Franklin’s record title to her homestead property was free and clear.

PROTECTED HOMESTEAD PROPERTY

32. Franklin Prescott’s property is protected homestead property.

33. As a matter of law, any accounting under a prima facie non-existent note and mortgage was

impossible. The prima facie non-meritorious demand for an accounting was fraudulent.

34. Jennifer Franklin Prescott is not any “married woman”.

35. Jennifer Franklin Prescott is not any defendant and was not served.

36. Hugh D. Hayes is a named party Defendant in several actions. See, e.g., Summons/service,

U.S.A. Ex Rel, et al. v. U.S.A., et al. in U.S. District Court.

RECUSAL LAW

37. In light of the publicly recorded alterations of the official records and documents, Jennifer

Franklin Prescott has been forced to live in fear of public corruption and the lack of any

opportunity of fair, just, and transparent due process and proceedings.

38. Here, Defendant Judge Hayes knew that

a. Bankrupt Bankunited did not hold any instrument;

b. Seized and bankrupt Bankunited had no right to enforce and prosecute;

c. Florida’s real party in interest Rule, Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.210(a), only permitted an action to

be prosecuted if there had been an actual interest.

RULE 1.432 DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE “(a) Grounds. Any party may move to disqualify the judge assigned to the action on the grounds provided by statute. (b) Contents. A motion to disqualify shall allege the facts relied on to show the grounds for disqualification and shall be verified by the party.

9

(c) Time. A motion to disqualify shall be made within a reasonable time after discovery of the facts constituting grounds for disqualification. (d) Determination. The judge against whom the motion is directed shall determine only the legal sufficiency of the motion. The judge shall not pass on the truth of the facts alleged. If the motion is legally sufficient, the judge shall enter an order of disqualification and proceed no further in the action. (e) Judge's Initiative. Nothing in this rule limits a judge's authority to enter an order of disqualification on the judge's own initiative.”

Said rule was intended to unify the procedure for judicial disqualification.

RULE 2.330. DISQUALIFICATION OF TRIAL JUDGES 39. Said Rule stated:

(a) Application. This rule applies only to county and circuit judges in all matters in all divisions of court. (b) Parties. Any party, including the state, may move to disqualify the trial judge assigned to the case on grounds provided by rule, by statute, or by the Code of Judicial Conduct. (c) Motion. A motion to disqualify shall: (1) be in writing; (2) allege specifically the facts and reasons upon which the movant relies as the grounds for disqualification; (3) be sworn to by the party by signing the motion under oath or by a separate affidavit;”

SECTION 38.10, FLA. STAT.

40. Section 38.10 gives parties the right to move to disqualify a judge when the party fears that

“he or she will not receive a fair trial . . . on account of the prejudice of the judge of that

court against the applicant or in favor of the adverse party.” Fla. Stat. § 38.10. Rule of

Judicial Administration 2.330 specifies that a motion to disqualify must show that “the party

fears that he or she will not receive a fair trial or hearing because of specifically described

prejudice or bias of the judge.” Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330.

41. S. 38.10, Fla. Stat., stated:

10

38.10 Disqualification of judge for prejudice; application; affidavits; etc.--Whenever a party to any action or proceeding makes and files an affidavit stating fear that he or she will not receive a fair trial in the court where the suit is pending on account of the prejudice of the judge of that court against the applicant or in favor of the adverse party, the judge shall proceed no further, but another judge shall be designated in the manner prescribed by the laws of this state for the substitution of judges for the trial of causes in which the presiding judge is disqualified.

42. Here, Franklin Prescott has been “stating fear that she will not receive a fair trial in the court

where the suit is [purportedly] pending on account of the objective prejudice of the judge of

that court against the applicant. Here, objectively biased Judge Hayes “shall proceed no

further, but another judge shall be designated in the manner prescribed by the laws of this

state for the substitution of judges for the trial of causes in which the presiding judge is

disqualified.”

JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S RIGHT TO APPEAL

43. If the judge denies a motion to disqualify brought under § 38.10 the movant has the right to

appeal. Lynch v. State, ___ So. 2d ___, Nos. SC06-2233, SC07-1246, 2008 WL 4809783, at

*26 (Fla. Nov. 6, 2008). As the Florida Supreme Court recently held: “A motion to

disqualify is governed substantively by section 38.10, Florida Statutes, and procedurally by

Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330. Here, Franklin Prescott’s motion to

disqualify Defendant objectively partial Judge Hayes is citing § 38.10 and Rule 2.330, as

well as Canon 3E(1).

44. The Florida Supreme Court has also held, in effect, that § 38.10 and the Canons require the

same thing. See Livingston v. State, 441 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Fla. 1983). In Livingston the

court cited the Canon’s requirement that a judge disqualify himself when his “impartiality

might reasonably be questioned” and concluded that it was “totally consistent” with Florida

case law applying § 38.10. Id. Both require disqualification when a party can show “a well

11

grounded fear that she will not receive a fair trial at the hands of the judge.” Id. (quoting

State ex rel. Brown v. Dewell, 179 So. 695, 697-98 (Fla. 1938)); see also Berry v. Berry, 765

So. 2d 855, 857 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (quoting Canon 3E(1) when describing the standard for

granting a motion under § 38.10). Here of course, this Court was bound to follow Florida

appellate court decisions interpreting that state’s law. The final arbiter of state law is the

state Supreme Court, which is another way of saying that Florida law is what the Florida

Supreme Court says it is.

CANON(S) 3E(1), 3E(1)(f), FLORIDA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT

45. The Florida Supreme Court has adopted a Code of Judicial Conduct to govern the actions

of state court judges and candidates for judicial office. Canon 3E(1) states, e.g.:

(1) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances where …

46. Those provisions address situations in which a judge must disqualify himself because his

“impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” including when he has “made a public

statement that commits, or appears to commit, the judge with respect to” a particular party,

issue, or controversy. Canon 3E(1) [general disqualification provision in Canon 3E(1)],

3E(1)(f) [“commits clause” at Canon 3E(1)(f)].

47. Canon 3E(1), backed by the threat of a disciplinary proceeding, requires a judge to

disqualify himself if his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Fla. Stat. § 38.10,

supplemented by Rule 2.330, allows a party to have a judge disqualified for the same reason.

48. Canon 3E(1)(f), which the Florida Supreme Court adopted in January 2006, covers one area

in which a judge’s “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” See In re Amendment to

Code of Judicial Conduct, 918 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 2006). In addition to the Florida Supreme

Court, the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee (Ethics Committee) and the Judicial

12

Qualifications Commission (JQC) have roles in administering the Code. The Florida

Supreme Court established the Ethics Committee “to render written advisory opinions to

inquiring judges concerning the propriety of contemplated judicial and non-judicial conduct.”

Petition of Comm. on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 327 So. 2d 5, 5 (Fla. 1976).

49. Canon 3E is enforced by the Judicial Qualifications Commission, which has the authority

to bring disciplinary charges against a judge.

SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS – WELL-GROUNDED FEARS

50. Here, Franklin Prescott has been specifically alleging the following facts and reasons upon

which the movant relied as the grounds for Defendant County Judge Hayes’

disqualification. Here, Franklin Prescott had well grounded fears that she will not receive

a fair trial at the hands of Defendant objectively partial and bribed County Judge Hugh D.

Hayes.

ADOPTION BY REFERENCE

51. Jennifer Franklin Prescott adopts by reference the pleadings and EXHIBITS on file and of

record in this Notice of Appeal and Notice of Disposition of facially fraudulent action.

WHEREFORE, Jennifer Franklin Prescott demands

1. An Order clarifying the disposition in favor of J. Franklin Prescott on the official record;

2. An Order declaring the purported action fraudulent and a fraud on the Court;

3. An Order clarifying said purported “disposition”, “summons”, and “complaint”;

4. An Order for judgment and dismissal in favor of Jennifer Franklin Prescott on the record;

5. An Order declaring non-service on any defendant in this fraudulent action, Ch. 49, Fla.

Stat.;

6. An Order extinguishing the facially non-meritorious action;

13

7. An Order declaring the admitted lack of any record of any note or mortgage;

8. An Order declaring any reestablishment of any note or mortgage impossible;

9. An Order declaring the lack of any interest by Bankunited;

10. An Order declaring the action without any merit under existing law;

11. An Order enjoining any further fraud and harassment by Bankunited;

12. An Order for sanctions and expenses against said seized and bankrupt bank and its

dismissed and/or fired attorneys at Camner Lipsitz;

13. An Order removing the fired judicial officers with the Camner Lipsitz firm from these

proceedings, and striking their fraudulent pleadings, because they perpetrated record fraud

and fraud on this Court.

________________________ /s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott, record holder of unencumbered title to homestead property Victim of bankrupt Bankunited’s record fraud Victim of seized Bankunited founder Alfred Camner’s record fraud on this Court EXHIBITS ON FILE: DOCKET ALTERATIONS

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE U.C.C. Article 3, Negotiable Instruments PERJURY EVIDENCE, Nicholas Krancher

§ 673.3011, Fla. Stat.; Ch. 71, Fla. Stat.

F.D.I.C. FAILED BANK INFORMATION

Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - ALL / Case - 112009CA0060160001XX

New Search Return to Case List

Case Information Printer Friendly Version

Style: BANKUNITED vs FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, JENNIFER

Uniform Case Number: 112009CA0060160001XX Filed: 07/09/2009

Clerks Case Number: 0906016CA

Court Type: CIRCUIT CIVIL Disposition Judge: HAYES, HUGH D

Case Type: MORTGAGE FORECLOSURES Disposed: 08/12/2010

Judge: HAYES, HUGH D Reopen Reason:

Case Status: DISPOSED Reopened:

Next Court Date: Reopen Close:

Last Docket Date: 08/12/2010 Appealed:

Parties

Dockets

Events

Financials

1 of 1 pages. Entries per page: 60

Date Text All Entries

07/09/2009 CA48/REAL PROPERTY MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE (PRE 2010) (FILING)

07/09/2009 CIVIL COVER SHEET

07/09/2009 COMPLAINT

07/09/2009 NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS

07/09/2009 PAID $10.00 PER ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS $40.00

07/09/2009 REAL PROPERTY VALUATION SHEET

07/10/2009 SUMMONS ISSUEDJENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT/ WALTER PRESCOTT/ JOHN DOE/ MARY DOE/PLACED IN SOUTH FLORIDA PROCESS SERVERS BIN

09/03/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS MARY DOE

10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF LOST ORIGINAL SUMMONS JOHN DOE

10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS JOHN DOE

12/21/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS WALTER PRESCOTT

12/21/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT

02/22/2010 NOTICE OF APPEARANCEAS CO-COUNSEL BY ERIN M ROSE QUINN ON BEHALF OF PLT

04/06/2010 ALIAS SUMMONS ISSUEDJENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT/WALTER PRESCOTT/PLACED IN PROVEST LLC BIN

05/20/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT


06/15/2010 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COUNSEL TO CLERK

06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE AS TO WALTER PRESCOTT

06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE AS TO JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT

06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICEAS TO ANY AND ALL UNKNOWN PARTIES CLAIMING

06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF DILIGENT SEARCH AS TO WALTER PRESCOTT

06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF DILIGENT SEARCH AS TO JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT

Find it here...

Site Search

8/14/2010 Public Inquiry

apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 1/2

WINNER 2

Disposed: 08/12/2010

WINNER 2


WINNER 2

HAYES, HUGH D

WINNER 2

8/14/2010

06/15/2010 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COUNSEL TO GULF COAST BUSINESS REVIEW

06/17/2010 LETTER TO GULF COAST BUSINESS REVIEW

06/17/2010 NOTICE OF ACTIONTO WALTER PRESCOTT/JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT & ANY AND ALL UNKNOWNPARTIES CLAIMING

06/17/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING MAILED 6/18/10

06/18/2010 CONFIRMATION OF EMAIL RECEIVED BY GULF COAST BUSINESS REVIEW

07/07/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATIONNOTICE OF ACTION TO WALTER PRESCOTT/JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT/ANSWERWITHIN 30 DAYS OF FIRST PUBLICATION 6/25/10

07/09/2010 MOTION TO DISMISS BY JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT

07/22/2010 NOTICE OF SERVICE MOTION TO DISMISS

07/22/2010 MOTION TO DISMISS BY JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT /PRO SE

07/22/2010 MOTION TO ENJOIN / BY JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT -PRO SE

07/22/2010 NOTICE OF SERVICEOF PUBLISHED NOTICE OF RECORD & MOTION TO DISMISSBY DEFENDANT

07/23/2010 MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF COUNSEL

07/23/2010 MOTION TO DISMISS

07/23/2010 MOTION TO CLARIFY ALLEGED PLAINTIFFS PUBLISHED NOTICE OF RECORD FRAUD


08/12/2010 MOTION TO DISMISS PRO SE JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT

08/12/2010 BANKRUPTCY BANKUNITED

08/12/2010 CA48/REAL PROPERTY MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE (PRE 2010) (DISPOSITION)

08/12/2010 SUMMONS ISSUED ELSA JARERO/ PUT IN SOUTH FLORIDA PROCESS BIN

Wednesday night is regular maintenance time on our servers; as a result brief outages may occur.We apologize in advance for any inconvenience.

Home | Site Map | Search | Disclaimer | Privacy Statement | FAQs | Contact Us

This website is maintained by The Collier County Clerk of the Circuit Court. Under Florida law, emailaddresses are public records. If you do not want your email address released in response to a public records request, do not send email to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing.



WINNER 2

SUMMONS ISSUED ELSA JARERO/ PUT IN SOUTH FLORIDA PROCESS BIN

WINNER 2

DISPOSITION)

WINNER 2

COMPLAINT







Court Type: CIRCUIT CIVIL Disposition Judge:

Case Type: MORTGAGE FORECLOSURES Disposed:


Case Status: OPEN Reopened:



Parties

Dockets

Events

Financials



















08/12/2010 SUMMONS ISSUED ELSA JARERO/ PUT IN SOUTH FLORIDA PROCESS BIN



This website is maintained by The Collier County Clerk of the Circuit Court. Under Florida law, email

Find it here...

Site Search



WINNER 2

COMPLAINT

WINNER 2

SUMMONS ISSUED ELSA JARERO/ PUT IN SOUTH FLORIDA PROCESS BIN

WINNER 2

8/13/2010

addresses are public records. If you do not want your email address released in response to a public records request, do not send email to this entity. Instead, contact this office by phone or in writing.















Parties

Dockets

Events

Financials























Find it here...

Site Search



WINNER 2

DISPOSITION)

WINNER 2

DISPOSED

WINNER 2

08/12/2010

p g y

















Parties

Dockets

Events

Financials



07/09/2009 CA48/REAL PROPERTY MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE (PRE 2010) (FILING)

07/09/2009 CIVIL COVER SHEET


07/09/2009 NOTICE OF LIS PENDENS

07/09/2009 PAID $10.00 PER ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS $40.00

07/09/2009 REAL PROPERTY VALUATION SHEET

07/10/2009 SUMMONS ISSUEDJENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT/ WALTER PRESCOTT/ JOHN DOE/ MARY DOE/PLACED IN SOUTH FLORIDA PROCESS SERVERS BIN

09/03/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS MARY DOE

10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF LOST ORIGINAL SUMMONS JOHN DOE

10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS JOHN DOE


12/21/2009 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT

02/22/2010 NOTICE OF APPEARANCEAS CO-COUNSEL BY ERIN M ROSE QUINN ON BEHALF OF PLT

04/06/2010 ALIAS SUMMONS ISSUEDJENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT/WALTER PRESCOTT/PLACED IN PROVEST LLC BIN

05/20/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF NON-SERVICE OF SUMMONS JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT


06/15/2010 CORRESPONDENCE FROM COUNSEL TO CLERK

06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE AS TO WALTER PRESCOTT

06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE AS TO JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT

06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICEAS TO ANY AND ALL UNKNOWN PARTIES CLAIMING



Find it here...

Site Search



WINNER 2

DISPOSED

WINNER 2

08/20/2010

WINNER 2

Disposed: 08/12/2010



















08/17/2010 NOTICEOF BANKRUPT BANKUNITED INCIDENT REPORT APPARENT FALSIFICATIONS NOTICE

08/17/2010 NOTICE OF BANKRUPT BANKUNITED

08/17/2010 NOTICE OF BANKRUPT BANKUNITED DOCKET ALTERATIONS EVIDENCE

08/17/2010 NOTICE OF BANKRUPT NON SERVICE NOTICE

08/17/2010 NOTICEOF BANKRUPT BANKUNITED EMERGENCY DEMAND TO EXTINGUISH FRAUDULENTACTION

08/18/2010 NOTICE OF APPEALFROM ALTERATION OF RECORD NO ORDER ATTACHEDNO FEES ENCLOSED

08/20/2010 CORRESPONDENCE FROMAPPEAL CLEERK TO DCA W/NOTICE OF APPEALNO FEE INCLUDED

08/20/2010 BILLED APPEAL FILING FEE $150.00






WINNER 2

08/20/2010 BILLED APPEAL FILING FEE $150.00

Documents

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL …docshare01.docshare.tips/files/3670/36703974.pdf · 3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112, on this 31st day of August, 2010