william roberts vs america's wholesale lender appellant's opening

r,., ;-::'·! ::-"' ,~. ·- r fl' ,. . ji. !J . s . c c u ' ' -~ ! •

1 • :: I

", .• ? I'· " \ ·'"' r ' I ; r. nu "1 211' ,_) l' I 1 : :_· I

i.: l 1; ..... ~ ~

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF ~~fl§t)il.&j a 4. I q

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT DISTi~!CT c;:· UTAH

William J. Roberts

Plaintiff,- Appellate,

vs.

America's Wholesale Lender, BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP FKA Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, Recontrust Company N.A., Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., U.S. Bank National Association N.A., U.S. Bank National Association, RussellS. Walker

Defendants-Appellees

0 E f' lJ T Y c.: l .. L f1. t\

APPELLANT'S OPENING BRIEF

Case No. 12-4088

On Appeal from the United States District Court

For the District of Utah

The Honorable Judge Dee Benson

Case No. 2:11-cv-00597-DB

APPELLANT'S OPENING BRIEF

Respectfully submitted,

William J. Roberts Prose

140 MacArthur Ave.

Salt Lake City UT 84115

801-654-54 7 5

[email protected]

Oral Argument is not requested.

of 14

Appellate Case: 12-4088 Document: 01018878724 Date Filed: 07/13/2012 Page: 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents APPELLANT'S OPENING BRIEF ...................................................................................................................... 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................... 2

TABLE OF ATUTHORITIES .............................................................................................................................. 2

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION ..................................................................................................................... 3

STATEMENT OF ISSUES ................................................................................................................................. 3

STATEMENT OF FACTS .................................................................................................................................. 5

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ................................................................................................................... 7

ARGUMENT ................................................................................................................................................... 9

AMERICA WHOLESALE LENDER IS NOT A LEGAL ENTITY WITH LEGAL CAPACITY

STANDING AND JURISDICTION ........................................................................................................ 9

BAC IS WRONGFULLY FORECLOSING WITH NO STANDING .................................................. 11

MORTGAGE FRAUD ........................................................................................................................... 11

CLOUDS ON TITLE ............................................................................................................................. 12

APPELLANTS SUPERIOR TITLE ....................................................................................................... 12

CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................................. 13

TABLE OF ATUTHORITIES

Cases

America's Wholesale Lender v. Pagano, 87 Conn.App 474, 866 A.2d 698 (2005) ..................................... 9 AMERICA'S WHOLESALE LENDER v. Linda K. SILBERSTEIN eta! 866 A.2d 695 87 Conn.App. 485

(2005) .................................................................................................................................................... 10

Statutes

Code 78B-6-130 1 provides as follows: Quiet title ..................................................................................... 12

Mortgage Fraud U.C.A. § 76-6-1203 ........................................................................................................... 8

U.C.A. § 57-1-23 Sale of a trust property-Power ofTrustt-Foreclosure of trust deed ............................ 8

of 14


Utah Code Annotated 57-1-35 .................................................................................................................... 12

Utah statute U.C.A. § 57-1-23 .................................................................................................................... 10

Rules

Internal Revenue Code I.R.C. §§860A-G ..................................................................................................... 6

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

This case was decided by the Federal District Court for the State of Utah.

The Defendants America's Wholesale Lender (Hereinafter "AWL"), BAC Home

Loans Servicing, LP FKA Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, (Hereinafter

"BAC") RECONTRUST Company N.A., Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., claim to

not be citizens of the State of Utah. U.S. Bank National Association N.A., U.S.

Bank National Association, RussellS. Walker are citizens of Utah but in

Defendant's Notice ofRemoval, page 2, Docket# 2, 6/27/2011 This Notice of

Removal is filed with the consent of defendants U.S. Bank, N.A.l and Russell S.

Walker.

The Plaintiff is a citizen of Utah. The loan in question and the home that

secured the loan have value in excess of the $100,000. This appeal comes from the

Order of Judge Dee Benson granting Defendants' I Appellees' motion to dismiss

Dated April18 2012. The Plaintiffs/Appellants filed their Notice of appeal on

5/17/2012.

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

The District Court erred in dismissing the causes in regards to the plaintiffs claim

that the defendant AWL had no legal capacity and standing as a trade name (Stated

of 14


in Defendants Motion to Dismiss Docket #6 7/18/2011 page 7 "the Defendant

AWL named in the complaint is the trade name from Countrywide Home Loans,

Inc (Hereafter CLH).")

The District Court erred in dismissing the causes in regards to the plaintiffs claim

that the defendant BAC was not the beneficial owner of the note and Trust Deed

and had no standing to foreclose. The Appellant has found the true owner (if AWL

had legal capacity to assign the note) of the note. That owner is Fannie Mae. See

Roberts Declaration Exibit 1. The trust deed is not a MERS document so the

beneficial owner is the only one that can execute documents in it's behalf. They

have not declared a default or substituted a trustee, to initiate the foreclose process

in Utah. BAC is only the servicer of the loan; they work for the owner Fannie

Mae to collect payment. BAC knew Fannie Mae was the real beneficial owner of

the note when they were executing, filing, notarizing, and recording documents

with the county recorder office, falsie stating they were the beneficial owners of

the note.

The District Court erred in dismissing the cause in regards to the plaintiffs claim

of Quiet Title. The plaintiff clearly showed his superior clam of title with his

warranty deed as an undisputed exhibit in complaint. Plaintiff clearly showed that

any lien created by the deed of trust to AWL was not valid because of their

fictitious status and as so must be cleared in quieting the title


of unjust enrichment finding that there was an enforceable contract between

America's Wholesale Lender and Roberts. It is unjust to allow BAC who is not

of 14


the beneficial owner of the trust deed the right to foreclose. If Fannie Mae claim of

ownership of the note and trust deed is validated by this court and then in the quiet

title hearing only they would have the right to foreclose


of Reckless/Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress. BAC scheduled sale of

the plaintiffs home 3 times and canceled them within hours of the sale time. This

has been done without the right to sell the property because they are not the

beneficial owner of the deed of trust. Currently the Appellees BAC has a sale

scheduled for the July 1oth 2012. The Appellant has not even been notified of this

but has received letters from bankruptcy attorneys stating this.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

William J. Roberts is the owner of the home under a warranty Deed of Real

Property commonly known as 140 MacArthur Avenue Salt Lake City UT 84115

(Hereinafter "The Real Estate") complaint page 3 filed with Third District Court.

The Appellants executed a Trust Deed Refinance on 7/2/2003 with AWL

(complaint page 3). AWL is a fictitious entity, "Admitted by Appellees to be only

at trade name" (Docket #6 7118/20 11 page 7), but claims on the trust deed to be a

corporation operating and existing under the laws of New York. No such

corporation existed. Complaint page 3 and 4.No where on the trust deed does it

say that AWL is a trade name or DBA of Countrywide. (See Exhibit 1 Trust Deed

complaint).

of 14


The Note and Trust Deed was sold in July 1st of 2003to the now identified

depositor of the REMIC Trust, which is now known Fannie Mae. Once a note and

trust deed is deposited in a REMIC Trust it cannot be removed because of the

trusts Internal Revenue Code I.R.C. §§860A-G for pass through tax status. Fannie

Mae has verified that the mortgage has not been removed from the trust. See

Exhibit 1 (Declaration by William Roberts).

Diana Feehan, an employee ofRecontrust a subsidiary ofBAC, signed a

Corporation Assignment of the Deed of Trust/ Mortgage on 10/21/2008 from AWL

to Countrywide Home Loans Inc. Recorded in Salt Lake County Utah Document #

10547150 Complaint page 5, Docket# 13 Memo in Opposition to Motion to

Dismiss page 2. At this time the loan was owned by a Fannie Mae Trust. See

Exhibit 1 Declaration by William Roberts.

Angela Nava, an employee of Recontrust a subsidiary of BAC, signed

Corporation Assignment of the Deed of Trust/ Mortgage on July 7, 2009 from

AWL to BAC. Recorded in Salt Lake County Utah Document# 10750420.

Complaint page 4, Docket # 13 Memo in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss page 4

at this time the loan was owned by a Fannie Mae Trust. See Exhibit 1 Declaration

by William Roberts.

A Notice of Default was filed by substitute trustee Recontrust Company NA

on 7/3/2009.

Substitution of Trustee executed on 7/8/2009 by Angela Nava as Assistant

Secretary of BAC, substituted in Recontrust as Trustee. At this time the loan was

owned by a Fannie Mae Trust. See Exhibit 1 Declaration by William Roberts.

of 14


The Defendant Recon Trust Company NA Acting as trustee for BAC as the

beneficial interest holder scheduled a foreclosure sale of the property for June 7th

2011 at 10:30 AM. Complaint page 7 at this time the loan was owned by a Fannie

Mae Trust. See Exhibit !Declaration by William Roberts.

On November 2, 2011, Armand J. Howell, a member of the Utah bar, was

substituted as trustee, Docket 23 Defendants Response to Plaintiffs Opposition to

Notice of Supplemental Authority page 3 Substitution was executed by BAC on

2/1112011. At this time the loan was owned by a Fannie Mae Trust. See Exhibit 1

Declaration by William Roberts.

Notice ofDefault was filed by Howell on Nov 2 2011 and Recorded at the county

Recorder's Office Document# 11275358 Exhibit #2. Notice of Default stated

BAC was the beneficial owner at this time the loan was owned by a Fannie Mae

Trust. See Exhibit 1 Declaration by William Roberts.

A Corporate Assignment of the Trust Deed was executed on 4/20/2012 from

Countrywide Home Loans Inc. To BAC Exhibit 3. At this time the loan was

owned by a Fannie Mae Trust. See Exhibit 1 Declaration by William Roberts.

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

In the case Roberts alleged that AWL was a fictitious entity not a corporation

under the United States Constitution, it has no legal capacity and thus no standing.

A fictitious name "party" has no legal existence (standing) and cannot sue or

defend any action under the law or execute any legally binding documents in that

of 14


fictitious name. A legal entity is a natural person or a corporation or other business

structure formed under the laws of a specific state. A trade name is not a legal

business structure. As such the alleged assignee BAC has no jurisdiction because

AWL with no legal capacity can't assign the note and trust deed. Therefore BAC

has no jurisdiction to use the non-judicial foreclosure procedures ofU.C.A. § 57-1-

23 Sale of a trust property-Power of Trust-Foreclosure of trust deed. The claim

for declaratory judgment because BAC is not the beneficiary of the trust deed and

not the true holder of the note, should not have been dismissed by Judge Benson.

Roberts Argued under Quiet Title, that his Warranty Deed was the superior claim

of title to the defendants claim of title or lien, none of the defendants from the

facts, had a valid claim of title. As such this cause of action should not have been

dismissed by Judge Dee Benson.

Roberts has had to suffer through 3 scheduled attempts by BAC to sell Roberts's

personal primary residence, when BAC as servicer for Fannie Mae, knew they

were not the beneficiary of the trust deed and didn't posses the power of sale. This

is evidence of reckless intentional infliction of emotional distress as such the cause

of action of reckless intentional infliction of emotional distress should not have

been dismissed by Judge Dee Benson.

The Cause ofFraud which includes Mortgage Fraud U.C.A. § 76-6-1203 A

person commits the offense of mortgage fraud if the person does any of the

following with the intent to defraud (3) files or causes to be filed with any county

recorder in Utah any document that the person knows contains a material

misstatement, misrepresentation, or omission; or " in the plaintiff Memorandum

of 14


Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss Docket # 13 Page 4 It states that BAC uses

Rencontrust Employees Angela Nava and Diana Feehan to execute and record in

the Salt Lake County Recorder's office documents stating BAC was the beneficial

owner of the Trust Deed and Note when they knew Fannie Mae was the beneficial

owner. This constitutes Mortgage Fraud under the Utah statute Roberts believes

this constitutes fraud by BAC, and as such the cause of Fraud should not have been

dismissed by Judge Benson.

ARGUMENT

AMERICA WHOLESALE LENDER IS NOT A LEGAL ENTITY WITH LEGAL CAPACITY STANDING AND JURISDICTION

AWL a trade name, by the United States Constitution, has no legal capacity and thus no standing. A fictitious name "party" has no legal existence (standing) and cannot sue or defend any action or execute any legally binding documents in that fictitious name. A legal entity is a natural person or a corporation or other business structure formed under the laws of a specific state. A Trade name is not a legal business structure. The Note and Trust Deed executed by plaintiff states clearly that AWL "is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of New York". It does not say America's Wholesale Lender, a trade name of Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. which is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of New York.

In the Roberts, Opposition to Supplemental Authority Docket #27 Page 3

and Notice of Supplemental Authority, Docket 29 and his Objection to Docket

#33Magistrate's Report and Recommendation Docket#34 page 6, Roberts cites;

America's Wholesale Lender v. Pagano, 87 Conn.App 474, 866 A.2d 698 (2005).

of 14


and AMERICA'S WHOLESALE LENDER v. Linda K. SILBERSTEIN et al 866

A.2d 695 87 Conn.App. 485 (2005). The defendants did not oppose the finding of

the cases as legal precedence or cite opposing cases. This case has identical facts

as our case. Neither Magistrate Alba nor Judge Benson addressed or provided any

legal decisions to the contrary. We believe this decision by the Connecticut State

Appeals court got it right. The Appellant knows this decision is not steering legal

precedents to the Utah District court or United States Court of Appeals for the

Tenth Circuit. Needless it was a supplemental authority entered and not objected

to by the defendants, and not addressed by the Judge in his decision. The

Appellant again asks the court to take Judicial Notice of the AMERICA'S

WHOLESALE LENDER v. Linda K. SILBERSTEIN and America's Wholesale

Lender v. Pagano Ruling by the Connecticut State Appeals. Both Cases clearly

found that AWL had no legal capacity ... in AMERICA'S WHOLESALE

LENDER v. Linda K. SILBERSTEIN et al "We conclude that because a trade

name is not an entity with legal capacity to sue, the corporation has no standing to

litigate the merits of the case. in America's Whole Sale Lender v. Pagano, supra

it was clear that AWL could not transfer the loan ... " An assignee, however, may

not commence an action solely in a trade name either, regardless of the entity to

which the trade name applies, because a trade name is not an entity with the legal

capacity to sue. Nor could Countrywide cure the jurisdictional defect by

substituting a party with the legal capacity to sue on behalf of the trade name. The

named plaintiff in the original complaint never existed. As a result, there was no

legally recognized entity for which there could be a substitute" Since Connecticut

is a judicial foreclosure state the decision was AWL could not sue to foreclose. In

our state which a non judicial foreclosure state the questions is could they or an

of 14


alleged assignee use the Utah statute U.C.A. § 57-1-23 Sale of a trust property

Power of Trust-Foreclosure of trust deed to take the Appellants Real Property.

We believe because AWL was a non-entity, with no standing, and has no legal

capacity, as such could not assign the loan. We belive the court should not let

them use a non- judicial law to foreclose on Robert's.

BAC IS WRONGFULLY FORECLOSING WITH NO STANDING

If AWL is found to be a legal entity by this court, It is known that AWL sold

the note and trust deed in 2003 to Fannie Mae. (See Roberts Declaration Exhibit

1 ). Since Fannie Mae has not substituted in a substitute trustee and has not declared

a Notice of Default, the loan is not in foreclosure and certainly can't be sold by an

invalid Trustee, substituted by BAC a party with no beneficial interest in the note

or trust deed. So the actions by BAC to sell Roberts Real Property is invalid and

the court should rule in favor of a Declaratory Judgment for the Appellant.

MORTGAGE FRAUD

Since AWL and CHL: has been creating and executing and recording

mortgage documents including Corporate Assignments, Substitutions of Trustees

and Notices of Default with the knowledge that Fannie Mae would be the party that

would have the beneficial interest in the Note and Trust deed. They knowingly

created, executed, and recorded at the county recorder's office false and misleading

documents. This constitutes Mortgage Fraud by Utah statute and fraud.

of 14


CLOUDS ON TITLE

In doing this BAC, CHL and AWL have created multiple assignments and

clouds on title, and as such there is a need for a Quiet Title hearing for all parties to

produce their original Trust Deed and note with all assignment proving a perfected

chain of title, or the Appellant Warranty Deed would prevail as the superior claim

of title, for this reason the Quiet Title hearing is necessary.

APPELLANTS SUPERIOR TITLE

Appellant complaint alleges plaintiffs superior title through their warranty

Deed and alleges that the defendants claims are hostel to plaintiff, Utah State Code

788-6-1301 provides as follows: Quiet title-- Action to determine adverse claim to

property. A person may bring an action against another person to determine rights,

interests, or claims to or in personal or real property. Plaintiff alleges that they hold

highest claim of title under a warranty deed. Complaint p. 1. The Plaintiff is not

coming in a stranger, to the property and claiming a lack of title in others to quiet

title to the world. The Plaintiff has a warranty deed and is making allegations to

quiet title as to these defendants that have recorded interests hostile to the

Plaintiffs, interests under the warranty deed. As stated in the statute, the Plaintiff

has filed a count to determine the rights, interests, or claims of the Defendants to

the Real Estate in relation to the Plaintiffs Warranty Deed. Utah Code Annotated

57-1-35 provides as follows: Trust deeds-- Transfer of secured debts as transfer of

security.

of 14


i

The transfer lof any debt secured by a trust deed shall operate as a transfer of

the security there£ re. Pursuant to the statute, once the debt, or in this case, the

Note is transferred the security, or benefit of the Trust Deed is transferred to the

holder of the Note. In this case, the facts alleged are that these defendants are not

the note holders o the promissory note executed by the plaintiff. If such is true,

none of these defe dants are the beneficiaries of the Trust Deed. The plaintiff has

alleged facts callin into question the validity of the recorded assignments,

statements purport ng to transfer beneficial interest in the trust deed. Only the

beneficiary or its a ent can transfer its interests. Therefore, pursuant to U.C.A. §

57-1-3 5, only the ote holder, or its agent can transfer the beneficial interest.

Making a quiet titl hearing necessary to establish who holds the original wet ink

note and trust dee if they exist.

CONCLUSION

In the case the app llant has alleged that the jurisdictional status of AWL.

precludes them from going to court and using the law to foreclose or even

transferring the loan for that purpose. AWL doesn't have the legal capacity to

execute documents under the law. This would make the trust deed unenforceable

this would create an unenforceable contract. This creates the claim or unjust

enrichment. If Appellees BAC were allowed to foreclose and sell the plaintiffs

of 14


real property they would be unjustly enriched. The appellees BAC, Recontrust and

CHL have created and Recorded in the County Recorder's office documents they

knew, stated misleading claims of their beneficial ownership and by doing this they

have committed mortgage fraud under the statute.

No beneficial owner of the mortgage, if there is one, with enforceable right to the

powers of the trust deed, has declared a default, and followed the steps under Utah

Foreclosure law. For this reason the Plaintiffs have alleged facts, along with

reasonable inferences, that would entitle Plaintiffs to relief

Respectfully submitted this gth day of July, 2012.

William J. Roberts

of 14


Exhibit 1


IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

William J. Roberts

Plaintiff,- Appellate, APPELLANT'S OPENING BRIEF

vs.

America's Wholesale Lender, BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP FKA Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, Recontrust Company N.A., Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., U.S. Bank National Association N.A., U.S. Bank National Association, RussellS. Walker

Defendants-Appellees

Case No. 12-4088

On Appeal from the United States District Court

William J. Roberts Prose

140 MacArthur Ave.

Salt Lake City UT 84115

801-654-5475

[email protected]

Page 1 of3


I, William J. Roberts, declare:

1. I am the appellant in this case. I am the owner of the subject property

described in the appeals brief.

2. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration and

if called and sworn as a witness could and would competently testify thereto.

3. I give this declaration in support of my opening brief 1 01h Circuit

Appeals Court

4. The party claiming to be the current holder of the first priority deed of

trust on the subject property, BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP FKA Countrywide

Home Loans Servicing LP , is not the current holder of my note and deed of Trust.

5. I found my loan on the Fannie Mae locator website it stated they were

the investor on my loan.

6. To clarify that it was my first mortgage I called the Fannie Mae

resource center 800-732-6643 on July 91h 2012 at 9:12AM and spoke with Amy ID

#828.

7. Amy confirmed that Fannie Mae is the owner of the trust deed and note

of my first mortgage executed on July 2nd 2003 from Countrywide Home Loans Inc.

8. Amy said they acquired it on July 1st 2003. and have owned it

continually since then.

9. She said the Note and trust deed and note vested in a Fannie Mae

Page 2 of3


REMIC Trust and the trustee of the trust was US Bank NA.

1 0. She stated they keep records of the call and that they could release them

to third parties they work with.

fl Executed at S. C C..; U'[ , this~ day of July, 2012.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of

America and the laws of the State of Utah that the foregoing is true and correct.

William~ J. Roberts

Page 3 of3


Exhibit 2


11275358

AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Annand J. Howell, Esq. Matheson and Howell, PC 648 East First South Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 Telephone: (801} 363-2244 MMOJ No.: 027322m Title No.: jt IJ-£/1/ I)

11275358 11nt2011 3:55:00 PM $10.00 Book - 9964 Pg - 8583 GaryW. Ott Recorder, Salt Lake County, UT GUARDIAN TITLE BY: eCASH, DEPUTY- EF 1 P.

NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND ELECTION TO SELL

On or about July 2, 2003, William J Roberts, as trustor, executed and delivered to Scott Lundberg, Attorney, as Trustee, for the benefit of America's Wholesale Lender, as Beneficiary, a trust deed to secure the perfonnance by the trustor of the obligations Wlder a promissory note. The Trust Deed was recorded in the office of the Salt Lake County Recorder, State of Utah, on July 8, 2003, as Entry No. 8722534, in Book 8836, at Page 3229 and covers the following real property:

LOT 21, VICTORY VILLAGE, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF ON FILE AND OF RECORD IN THE SALT LAKE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE.

Tax Parcel No.: 15-13-476-026

Bank of America, N.A., Successor by Merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP FK.A CoWltrywide Home Loans Servicing LP is the current holder of the beneficial interest Wlder the trust deed and Armand J. Howell is the current trustee. The obligations Wlder the promissory note and trust deed are in default for failure to make the monthly payments. The principal balance is accelerated and due, together with any other obligations including interest, late charges, costs and trustees' and attorneys' fees. Accordingly, the trustee has elected to sell the property described in the trust deed as provided by law.

THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO COLLECT A DEBT AND ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. FOR QUESTIONS, CALL (801) 363-2244. OFFICE HOURS ARE 8:30AM to 4:30PM, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY.

DATED: November 2, 2011.

State of Utah :ss.

County of Salt Lake )

The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 2nd day of November. 2011, by Armand J. Howell, Successor Trustee.

~~ d- ~~h<=--Notary Public "

------"' r---- NQWYP~ I •• ROC$ .. , I -=~=-I

' ,.. ,1! ~ot~-.1 ____

... ____ .

BK 9964 PG 8583


Exhibit 3


AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO:

Armand J. Howell, Esq. Matheson and Howell PC 648 East First South Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 Telephone: (801) 363-2244 MMOJ No.: 027322m

II- ;;2_7 I I lA) Parcel ID #: 15-13-476-026

ASSIGNMENT OF DEED OF TRUST

11378149 4/26/20121:09:00 PM $12.00 Book -10011 Pg -7298-7299 GaryW. Ott Recorder, Salt Lake County, UT GUARDIAN TITLE S UT BY: eCASH, DEPUTY - EF 2 P.

FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Countrywide Home Loans, Inc, hereby assigns to:

Bank of America, N.A., Successor by Merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP FKA Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP

that certain Deed of Trust, together with the indebtedness secured thereby, which Deed of Trust is dated July 2, 2003, was executed by William J Roberts, as Trustor, to Scott Lundberg, Attorney, as Trustee, and filed for record with the Salt Lake County Recorder on July 8, 2003, as Entry No. . 8722534, in Book 8836, at Page 3229, situated in said County, described as follows:

LOT 21, VICTORY VILLAGE, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF ON FILE AND OF RECORD IN THE SALT LAKE COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE.

1

BK 10011 PG 7298


MM:OJ No.: 027322m Parcel ID #: 15-13A76-026

Coun~deHomeLo~,fuc

By: v P/i}/..;f'-'r-' /}1,(.4,{[-r Ve..r \ vt.IA.. II.. G,rd::f u?

Its: 7'155\s+c..,·.-\· 'b c_e, Pce...s1 de..;1+ '

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

State of f6Xf(S )

County of QIV LJ45 )

0 /], \ '?0 O~ 1 be.&. !l." ' r;<'" '"~'"t.;)f N bl" n t!fr' ,r.. 0 v\ · J.Ore me, ~'-qmt!n8 G;' ~~oi.:.\'li'-';' , otary Pu 1c, personally appear&! \le-rl, n..cc ,4. r. n ff, .a , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence tobe the person(s) whose name(s) @are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/@"they executed the same in his@their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his@their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. ·

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of --r=ex&s· that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

Witness my hand and official seal.

Signature 'fbe c?! r?4;;;;J::::::;;:-~:·:.~'::·;~:;!$.: \? ~.US~@G.

2

(Seal)

. MAXINE P. LUSTER Notary Pubtio State Of Texas

My Comm. Exp. 01·23·2014

BK 10011 PG 7299


william roberts vs america's wholesale lender appellant's opening

Documents