IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA

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

purported “plaintiff”

vs. DISPOSED CASE NO.: 09-6016-CA

JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, et al.

___________________________________________________________________________/

LACK OF jurisdiction NOTICE TO CIRCUIT & DISTRICT COURTS

MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE OF CH. 673, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND

SEIZED BANK’S FAILURE TO establish any note & state any cause

MEMORANDUM

1. The attached Docket showed:

09/02/2010 ORDER BY DCA

APPELLANT SHALL WITHIN 15 DAYS SHALL FILE AN AMENDED APPEAL

Here, neither this Court nor the District Court of Appeal had jurisdiction.

2. The enforcement of lost promissory notes, which are negotiable instruments, is governed by

section 673.3091, Florida Statutes and not section 71.011, which governs enforcement of lost

papers.

3. In State Street Bank and Trust Co., Trustee for Holders of Bear Stearns Mortgage Securities,

Inc. Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1993-12 v. Harley Lord, et al., 851 So.2d

790 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), the Court held that State Street could not maintain a cause of

action to enforce a missing promissory note or to foreclose on the related mortgage in the
 absence of proof that it or its assignor ever held possession of the promissory note. Section

673.3091, Florida Statutes (2002).

4. In Mason v. Rubin, 727 So.2d 2883 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) the court had previously held that

the reestablishment of a lost promissory note which is a negotiable instrument is controlled

by section 673.3091, Florida Statutes (1993) and not section 71.011, Florida Statutes (1995).

The court explained that section 71.011, Florida Statutes (1995) provides for establishing lost

documents “except when otherwise provided” — the implication being that section 673.3091,

Florida Statutes (1993) otherwise provides. The court also characterized the provisions of

section 673.3091, Florida Statutes (1993) as “more stringent requirements” than section

71.011, Florida Statutes (1995).

5. The Court explained that pursuant to section 90.953, Florida Statutes, (2002), Florida’s code

of evidence, the plaintiff in a mortgage foreclosure must present the original promissory note

because a duplicate of a note is not admissible. Otherwise, the plaintiff must meet the

requirements of section 673.3091, Florida Statutes to pursue enforcement. W. H. Dwoning v.

First Na’tl Bank of Lake City, 81 So.2d 486 (Fla.1955), Nat’l Loan Investors, L.P. v. Joymar

Assocs., 767 So.2d 549, 551 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).

6. In this fraudulent action, there was no evidence as to WHO possessed WHAT purported

note WHEN. See also Slizyk v. Smilack, 825 So.2d 428, 430 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), Deakter

v. Menendez, 830 So.2d 124 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).

FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH STATUTES AND STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION

7. If a party is not in possession of the original note and cannot reestablish it, the party cannot

prevail in an action on the note. In Dasma Investments, LLC v. Realty Associates Fund III,

L.P., 459 F.Supp.2d 1294 (S.D.Fla.2006) the court explained that in Florida a promissory

note is a negotiable instrument and that a party suing on a promissory note, whether just on

2
 the note itself or together with a foreclose on a mortgage securing the note, must be in

possession of the original of the note or reestablish the note pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 673.3091.

Shelter Dev. Group, Inc. v. Mma of Georgia, Inc., 50 B.R. 588, 590 (Bkrtcy. S.D. Fla.1985).

LAWFULLY SEIZED BANKUNITED’S FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CH. 673, F.S.

8. A party must comply with section 673.3091, Florida Statues, in order to enforce a lost,

destroyed or stolen negotiable instrument. Here, lawfully seized BankUnited, FSB [F.D.I.C.

seizure]

a. FAILED to state that the creditors ever received possession of any original promissory
note;
b. FAILED to state a cause of action;
c. FAILED to satisfy the conditions precedent to sue, Ch. 673, Florida Statutes;
d. COULD NOT possibly have complied with section 673.3091, Florida Statues.

RECORD LACK OF promissory note

9. The original document that is generally required to be filed with the court in a mortgage

foreclosure proceeding is the promissory note, not the mortgage. The Evidence Code

provides the rationale for this conclusion. Section 90.952, Florida Statutes (2002), indicates

that original documents are required to prove the contents of a writing.

10. A promissory note is a negotiable instrument within the definition of section 673.1041(1),

and either the original must be produced, or the lost document must be reestablished under

section 673.3091, Florida Statutes (2002). See Mason v. Rubin, 727 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 4th

DCA 1999); see also Downing v. First Nat'l Bank of Lake City, 81 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 1955);

Thompson v. First Union Nat'l Bank, 673 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Figueredo v.

Bank Espirito Santo, 537 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

LAWFULLY SEIZED BANKUNITED HAD NO right to the payment of money

11. Here, no writing on file evidenced any right to the payment of money by lawfully seized

bankrupt bank BankUnited, FSB, Ch. 673, Florida Statutes.

3
 JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT DEMANDED PROTECTION FROM FRAUD

12. Because it is negotiable, the promissory note must be surrendered in a foreclosure

proceeding so that it does not remain in the stream of commerce. Indeed, if the foreclosing

party alleges that the note is lost, destroyed or stolen, the trial court is authorized by statute

to take the necessary actions to protect the party purportedly required to pay the note against

loss that might occur by reason of a claim by another party to enforce the instrument. See

section 673.3091(2), Fla. Stat. (2002).

13. A mortgage is the security for the payment of the negotiable promissory note, “and is a mere

incident of and ancillary to such note.”

08/12/2010 FINAL DISPOSITION FOR LACK OF “proper plaintiff”

LAWFULLY SEIZED BANKUNITED, FSB, HAD NO interest & NO standing

14. Here, the admitted loss, the time and manner of which was unknown, was

a. “the result of a transfer or lawful seizure”, [F.D.I.C.], Ch. 673, Florida Statutes;
b. precluded any establishment of any agreement and/or breach of contract.

BUSTED BANKUNITED FAILED ITS BURDEN

15. Here, the burden was on lawfully seized BankUnited, i.e., the party seeking to enforce the

lost “instrument”. See § 673.3091(2), Fla. Stat. (2008).

PROVEN INVALIDITY OF RECORD

16. Furthermore here, the invalidity had been proven in the pleadings, Fla. Stat. § 673.3081

(2008).

17. A court will not enforce an instrument unless the defendant will be adequately protected

against future claims on the lost note. Perry v. Fairbanks, 888 So.2d 725, 727, (Fla. 5d DCA

2004).

4
18. Here, lawfully seized BankUnited FSB, did not have standing to bring and/or maintain any

mortgage foreclosure action against Jennifer Franklin Prescott, because it had proven on the

record that it did not hold any note and /or mortgage. Here, said admitted and known non-

holder of any note had no standing to seek any enforcement of the fictitious note.

“LAWFUL SEIZURE”, FDIC, OF BANKUNITED, FSB’S PROPERTY & NOTES

19. The property of bankrupt BankUnited, FSB, was “lawfully seized“, Ch. 673, Florida

Statutes. Here in particular, any and all notes and mortgages in the name of failed

BankUnited, FSB, were lawfully seized. Here, lawfully seized BankUnited, FSB:

a. was not a proper party to bring this facially fraudulent action;

b. failed to state a cause of action;
c. could never, under any circumstances, be the proper plaintiff to bring any foreclosure
action against Jennifer Franklin Prescott.

“LAWFUL SEIZURE” OF BUSTED BANKUNITED, FSB

20. The admitted loss of the fictitious promissory note was due to lawful seizure of bankrupt

BankUnited, FSB, and/or transfer. Here, lawfully seized BankUnited was not entitled to

enforce the fictitious note.

SEIZED BANKUNITED FAILED TO COMPLY WITH CONDITION PRECEDENT

21. Here, lawfully seized BankUnited could not have possibly satisfied the absolutely required

“condition precedent”, Ch. 673, Florida Statutes.

FRAUDULENT & FALSE PRETENSES - MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION

22. “BankUnited, FSB”, fraudulently pretended:

“9. On February 15, 2006, Franklin Prescott executed and delivered a promissory
note to Bankunited …” “Complaint”, p. 3.

Here on 02/15/2006, BankUnited had not even legally existed.

“16. Plaintiff owns and holds the note and mortgage.” “Complaint”, p. 5.

5
 “6. Said [fictitious] 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.” “Complaint”, p. 3.

Here, bankrupt BankUnited did not hold or own any note and mortgage. Here, any and

all notes and mortgages had been seized by a U.S Agency. Here, there was fraud on the

Court, Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540.

THIS COURT’S AUTHORITY TO SANCTION SEIZED BANK’S ATTORNEY(S)

23. This court has ample authority to sanction lawyers and lenders asserting improper and

facially fraudulent foreclosure claims. Here, Federal Agents had lawfully seized bankrupt

BankUnited, FSB. This court’s authority to sanction crooked attorneys is explicit in Florida

law and implicit in the courts' inherent power to sanction bad faith litigation.

24. Any party seeking to foreclose a mortgage without a good faith belief in the facts giving rise

to the asserted claim may be sanctioned “upon the court's initiative.” § 57.105(1), Fla. Stat.

25. This statute affords judges the authority to immediately impose significant penalties for

bringing unfounded litigation. See Moakely v. Smallwood, 826 So. 2d 221, 223 (Fla. 2002),

citing United States Savings Bank v. Pittman, 80 Fla. 423, 86 So. 567, 572 (1920)

(sanctioning attorney for acting in bad faith in a mortgage foreclosure sale).

CONFIRMED CANCELLATION

26. On 09/02/2010, at 11:20 AM, the Clerk inside Hearing Room 4-1, Naples Courthouse, and

Bailiff D. Chenoweth confirmed the cancellation of the unauthorized “hearing” before

judicial imposter “Tony Perez” and/or Antonio J. Perez-Benitoa.

27. The Court explained that Perez-Benitoa was “under contract with” this Court for “one day

per week”. The Court did not disclose “Tony Perez’ credentials.

28. Franklin Prescott contacted the Florida Bar in this matter.

6
29. Pursuant to the Magistrate’s Office, Debbie, Supervisor, Melanie [09/02/2010, AM], the

“09/02/2010 hearing” before judicial imposter “Tony Perez” was cancelled.

30. Here, the law required use of the legal name of any judicial officer. “Tony Perez” is not any

legal name.

NOTICE OF UNTIMELY “notice” and “entry”

31. On the day of the unauthorized hearing, 09/02/2010, the “notice of hearing” appeared for

the first time. On 09/01/2010, said “notice” had not appeared on the Docket.

IMPROPER USE OF NON-LEGAL NAME – JUDICIAL IMPOSTER “Tony Perez”

32. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s cancellation of

unauthorized “09/02/2010 hearing” because there was

a. Non-consent by J. Franklin Prescott;

b. No order of referral to any magistrate;
c. No notice of hearing;
d. No setting party of record;
e. No jurisdiction;
f. No standing.

Here, seized and bankrupt BankUnited, FSB, had no standing and could not have possibly

been any party.

33. Pursuant to the Magistrate’s Office, Supervisor Debbie, Rose, 239-252-8870

a. Jennifer Franklin Prescott faxed her filed and recorded NOTICE OF NON-CONSENT
and NOTICE OF OBJECTION to the Magistrate’s Office;
b. Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s MOTION TO DISMISS is not to be heard in the record
absence of any notice of hearing required under the Rules. See Docket of this disposed
Case.

7
34. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s service of NOTICE OF

DISPOSITION AND NON-CONSENT upon the magistrate and/or Antonio J. Perez-Benitoa

at:

a. Magistrate’s Office, c/o Supervisor Debbie, Rose

Naples Courthouse
5th Floor
Naples, FL 34112,
T: 252-8331, F: 252-8870 and

b. Antonio J. Perez-Benitoa, P.A.

900 Sixth Avenue South
Suite 303
Naples, Florida 34102
Telephone: 239-430-1884
Fax: 239-30-1885
http://www.tonypblaw.com

35. Jennifer Franklin Prescott, record holder of unencumbered title to the subject property

[address: 25 6th ST North, Naples, Florida 34102] 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

36. 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.

8
 PUBLICLY RECORDED 08/12/2010 FINAL DISPOSITION

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

NO order of referral

38. Here, there were

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

39. 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 TIMELY NOTICE OF ANY hearing

40. 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

9
 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

41. Pursuant to § 48.23, Fla. Stat.,

“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.

42. 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

43. 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

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

jurisdiction:

10
 NOTICE OF RELEASE & DISCHARGE OF FRAUDULENT lis pendens, CH. 48, F.S.

45. 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

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.

46. 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.

47. 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

48. 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.

49. Here, the Docket and official record alterations were

a. Arbitrary and capricious;

b. Unlawful.

11
WHEREFORE, Jennifer Franklin Prescott hereby again demands

1. An Order taking judicial notice, Ch. 92, Fla. Stat., of Ch. 673, Fla. Stat., and the “lawful

seizure” [F.D.I.C.] of busted BankUnited, FSB;

2. An Order taking judicial notice of Ch. 673, 59, 90, and 92, Fla. Stat.;

3. An Order sanctioning the attorneys of lawfully seized BankUnited, FSB, for their

unfounded and fraudulent action;

4. An Order directing judicial imposter “Tony Perez” to use and disclose his legal name.

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, judicial imposter “Tony Perez”, Magistrate’s Office, Debbie,
Supervisor, Fax: 239-252-8870, and Defendant Judge Hugh D. Hayes, Naples Courthouse, 3301
E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112, on this 3rd day of September, 2010.
The pleading is also being published worldwide.

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

12
9/5/2010 Public Inquiry

Find it here...
Site Search

Clerk To The Board

Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - A LL / C ase - 112009C A0060160001XX
Court Departments
Traffic
Ne w Se a rch R e turn to C ase List
Recording Department

Case Information Printer Friendly Version

Style: BANKUNITED vs FRANKLIN-PR ESC O TT, JENNIFER

Uniform Case Number: 112009C A0060160001XX Filed: 07/09/2009
Clerks Case Number: 0906016C A
Court Type: C IR C UIT CIVIL Disposition Judge: HAYES, HUGH D
Case Type: MO R TGAGE FO R ECLO SUR ES Disposed: 08/12/2010
Judge: HAYES, HUGH D Reopen Reason:
Case Status: DISPO SED Reopened:
Next Court Date: Reopen Close:
Last Docket Date: 09/02/2010 A ppealed:

Parties Dockets Events Financials

1 of 1 page s. Entrie s pe r page : 100

Date Text All Entries

07/09/2009 C A48/R EAL PR O PER TY MO R TGAGE FO R EC LO SUR E (PR E 2010) (FILING)
07/09/2009 C IVIL C O VER SHEET
07/09/2009 C O MPLAINT
07/09/2009 NO TIC E O F LIS PENDENS
07/09/2009 PAID $10.00 PER ISSUANC E O F SUMMO NS $40.00
07/09/2009 R EAL PR O PER TY VALUATIO N SHEET
07/10/2009 SUMMO NS ISSUED
JENNIFER FR ANKLIN PR ESC O TT/ W ALTER P R ESC O TT/ JO HN DO E/ MAR Y DO E/
PLAC ED IN SO UTH FLO R IDA PR O C ESS SER VER S BIN
09/03/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS MAR Y DO E
10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F LO ST O R IGINAL SUMMO NS JO HN DO E
10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JO HN DO E
12/21/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS W ALTER PR ESC O TT
12/21/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT
02/22/2010 NO TIC E O F APP EAR ANC E
AS C O -CO UNSEL BY ER IN M R O SE Q UINN O N BEHALF O F PLT
04/06/2010 ALIAS SUMMO NS ISSUED
JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT/W ALTER PR ESC O TT/P LAC ED IN PR O VEST LLC BIN
05/20/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JENNIFER FR ANKLIN PR ESC O TT
05/20/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS W ALTER PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 C O RR ESPO NDENCE FR O M C O UNSEL TO C LERK
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E AS TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E AS TO JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E
AS TO ANY AND ALL UNKNO W N PAR TIES C LAIMING
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F DILIGENT SEAR C H AS TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F DILIGENT SEAR C H AS TO JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-P R ESC O TT

apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 1/3
9/5/2010 Public Inquiry
06/15/2010 C O RR ESPO NDENCE FR O M C O UNSEL TO GULF C O AST BUSINESS R EVIEW
06/17/2010 LETTER TO GULF C O AST BUSINESS R EVIEW
06/17/2010 NO TIC E O F AC TIO N
TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT/JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PR ESC O TT & ANY AND ALL UNKNO W N
PAR TIES C LAIMING
06/17/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F MAILING MAILED 6/18/10
06/18/2010 C O NFIR MATIO N O F EMAIL R EC EIVED BY GULF C O AST BUSINESS R EVIEW
07/07/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F PUBLIC ATIO N
NO TIC E O F AC TIO N TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT/JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT/ANSW ER
W ITHIN 30 DAYS O F FIRST PUBLIC ATIO N 6/25/10
07/09/2010 MO TIO N TO DISMISS BY JENNIFER FR ANKLIN P RESC O TT
07/22/2010 NO TIC E O F SER VIC E MO TIO N TO DISMISS
07/22/2010 MO TIO N TO DISMISS BY JENNIFER FR ANKLIN P RESC O TT /PR O SE
07/22/2010 MO TIO N TO ENJO IN / BY JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT -P RO SE
07/22/2010 NO TIC E O F SER VIC E
O F PUBLISHED NO TIC E O F R EC O R D & MO TIO N TO DISMISS
BY DEFENDANT
07/23/2010 MO TIO N FO R C LAR IFIC ATIO N O F C O UNSEL
07/23/2010 MO TIO N TO DISMISS
07/23/2010 MO TIO N TO C LAR IFY ALLEGED PLAINTIFFS PUBLISHED NO TIC E O F R EC O R D FR AUD
08/12/2010 MO TIO N TO DISMISS PR O SE JENNIFER FR ANKLIN P RESC O TT
08/12/2010 BANKR UPTC Y BANKUNITED
08/12/2010 C A48/R EAL PR O PER TY MO R TGAGE FO R EC LO SUR E (PR E 2010) (DISPO SITIO N)
08/17/2010 BANKR UPTC Y BANKUNITED
08/17/2010 NO TIC E
O F BANKR UPT BANKUNITED INC IDENT R EPO R T APP AR ENT FALSIFIC ATIO NS NO TIC E
08/17/2010 NO TIC E O F BANKR UPT BANKUNITED
08/17/2010 NO TIC E O F BANKR UPT BANKUNITED DO C KET ALTER ATIO NS EVIDENC E
08/17/2010 NO TIC E O F BANKR UPT NO N SER VIC E NO TIC E
08/17/2010 NO TIC E
O F BANKR UPT BANKUNITED EMER GENC Y DEMAND TO EXTINGUISH FR AUDULENT
AC TIO N
08/18/2010 NO TIC E O F APP EAL
FR O M ALTER ATIO N O F REC O R D NO O R DER ATTAC HED
NO FEES ENC LO SED
08/20/2010 C O RR ESPO NDENCE FR O M
APP EAL CLEER K TO DC A W /NO TIC E O F AP PEAL
NO FEE INC LUDED
08/20/2010 BILLED APP EAL FILING FEE $150.00
08/26/2010 NO TIC E O F HEARING 9/2/10 @ 11:30 MO TIO NS TO DISMISS & ENJO IN
08/30/2010 NO TIC E O F R ELEASE O F LIS PENDENS FILED BY DEFENDANT
08/30/2010 FINAL DISPO SITIO N FO R M
08/31/2010 NO TIC E
O F R ELEASE & DISC HAR GE O F FRAUDULENT LIS PENDENS BY DEFENENDANT
JENNIFER FR ANKLIN PR ESC O TT
08/31/2010 FINAL DISPO SITIO N FO R M BY DEFENDANT
09/01/2010 NO TIC E O F SER VIC E
09/01/2010 NO TIC E O F SER VIC E
09/01/2010 DEFENDANT NO N C O NTEST TO ANY MAGISTR ATE
09/01/2010 O BJEC TIO N TO MAGISTR ATE
09/01/2010 NO TIC E O F C ANC ELLATIO N O F HEAR ING 9/2/10 FILED BY DEFENDANT
09/01/2010 NO TIC E O F R EC O R DATIO N O F RELEASE O F LIS PENDENS
09/01/2010 NO TIC E O F SER VIC E
O F NO TIC E O F DISPO SITIO N AND NO N C O NTEST TO ANY MAGISTR ATE
09/01/2010 O BJEC TIO N TO MAGISTR ATE
09/02/2010 C ANC ELLED
09/02/2010 MINUTES - HEAR ING SEE SC HEDULE MINUTES FO R DETAILS
09/02/2010 R EC EIP T FR O M DC A
AC KNO W LEDGMENT O F NEW C ASE FILED W /DC A 8/18/10 2D10-4158
09/02/2010 O R DER BY DC A
APP ELLANT SHALL W ITHIN 15 DAYS SHALL FILE AN AMENDED APPEAL

apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 2/3
9/5/2010 Public Inquiry
09/02/2010 O R DER BY DC A
APP ELLANT SHALL FO R W AR D FILING FEE O R O R DER O F INSO LVENC Y W ITTHIN
40 DAYS
09/02/2010 O R DER BY DC A APP ELLANT SHALL SHO W C AUSE W ITHIN 15 DAYS

W e dne sday night is re gular m a inte nance tim e on our se rve rs; as a re sult brie f o utage s m ay o ccur.
W e apologize in advance for any inconve nie nce.

Home | Site Map | Search | Disclaimer | Privacy Statement | FA Qs | Contact Us

This we bsite is m aintaine d by The C ollie r C ounty C le rk of the C ircuit C ourt. Unde r Flo rida law, e m ail
addre sse s are public re co rds. If you do not want your e m a il addre ss re le ase d in re sponse to a public
re cords re que st, do not se nd e m ail to this e ntity. Inste ad, co ntact this office by phone or in writing.

apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 3/3