Issac-Adisho v.Orlans Part 1

8/6/2019 Issac-Adisho v.Orlans Part 1

1/47

STATE OF MICHIGANSIXTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

MACOl\1B COUNTY

JANETTE ISSAC, Individually andYOUKHANA ADISHO, Individually,

Plaintiffs,v

ORLANS AND ASSOCIATES, P.C.,A Michigan Professional corporation,U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, ASTRUSTEE FOR THE STRUCTURE ASSETSECURITIES CORPORATION MORTGAGEPASS-THOUGH CERTIFICATES, 2006-EQ1,a New York Common Law Trust, MORTGAGEELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS,INC., a Delaware Corporation,

Defendants.

Han. John C. FosterCase No. 11-165-NO

Ziyad Kased (P72237)Attorney for Plaintiffs625 East Big Beaver Road, Suite 205Troy, Michigan 48083(248) 680-7300

Plunkett CooneyMatthew J. Boettcher (P40929)Patrick C. Lannen (P73031)Attorneys for U.S. Bank and MERS38505 Woodward Ave., Suite 205Bloomfield Hills, MI, 48304(248) 901-4035/4027

ORLANS ASSOCIATES, P.C.Kristina E. JanssensAttorney for Orlans1650 West Big Beaver RoadTroy, MI, 48084(248) 502-1580

PLAINTIFFS' BIUEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTORLANS ASSOCIATES, P.C's MOTION FOR SlJMl\IlARYJUDGMENT

Plaintiffs executed a unique purported mortgage, never seen before the creation ofMERS


2/47

in which the mortgagee is MERS but MERS is not the Lender on the Promissory Note. The

Lender in this mortgage is Equifirst. The mortgage the Plaintiffs signed was what is referred to

by MERS and its members as a ""MOM" mortgage. MOM stands for Mers as Original

Mortgagee. Before Defendant Orlans drafted this Motion to Dismiss pursuant to MCR 2.116

(C)(8), the Michigan Court of Appeals ruled on these MERS' MOM mortgages after carefully

analyzing the language in the mortgage documents themselves. The Court of Appeals ruled that

auv Mortgage nanling MERS as the Mortgagee in which the Mortgage was foreclosed by

advertisement is "void ab initio," Residential Funding, Co.LLC vs. Saurman, ---N.W.2D- - -

(2011); 2011

Further, MERS has acknowledged to the Congressional Oversight Panel dealing with

fraudulent documentation in the foreclosure process that it is familiar with the crisis and has in

fact admitted that it has learned that its so-called "certifying officers" have been pressured by

MERS members to perform activities not allowed by law or by the MERS Rules. M. Issacs'

. Exhibit 10 attached to his transcript.

The MERS Rules require that a candidate for a MERS certifying officer (i.e. an Assistant

Secretary and Assistant Vice President) must be an officer ora member. They must have a basic

understanding of the MERS model and be trained by the Member in how to perform their duties

as certifying officers. They also must pass all examination administered by !vIERS. See

Marshal Issacs Exhibit 8 attached to his transcript. Marshall Isaacs, an Attorney for Orlans,

was never an officer of the Lender in this case, EquiFirst Corporation and is, upon information

and belief, not an officer of U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR

THE STRUCTURE ASSET SECURITIES CORPORATION MORTGAGE PASS-

THOUGH CERTIFICATES, 2006-EQ1. He is the attorney who drafted the assignment from

2


3/47

MERS to U.S. BANK (as Trustee) in this case. MERS has also recently entered into a settlement

agreement with several federal regulators in which it was found that MERS was engaged in

harmful practices and one of the areas addressed is the role and actions ofMERS Certifying

Officers r "The agencies have found identified certain deficiencies and unsafe or unsound

practices by MERSCORP, Inc. (MERSCORP) and its wholly owned subsidiary Mortgage

Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) ... " Isaacs Exhibit 12 attached to his transcript.

The specific settlement agreement between the Federal Regulators and MERS addresses

specifically Certifying Officers. Exhibit 12 at Article 13, pages 13 through 14.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

MCR 2.1 16(C)(8) states that an action may be dismissed if the complaint fails to state a claim

upon which relief can be granted. Id. See also ABB PAINT FINISHING INC v. NATIONAL

UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH PA, Michigan Court of Appeals

Docket Number 192855, and May 16, 1997. A motion under MCR 2.116(C)(8) tests the legal

sufficiency of the complaint. Maiden v. Rosewood, 461 Mich. 109 (1999). All factualllegations

in the complaint must be presumed to be true, and reasonable inferences must be construed in a

light most favorable to the non-moving party. See KUZ11G r v.Raksha Corp., 481 Mich. 169, 176;

750 N.W.2d 121 (2008) and Wade v. Dep't. a/Corrections, 439 Mich. 158, 162 (1992). A

motion under MCR 2.116(C)(8) may only be granted where the claims alleged are clearly

unenforceable as a matter of law and no [actual developmellt could justify recovery. See Kuzna,

supra and Wade, supra. at 163. See also Int'l Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 58 v.

JvfcNulty, 214 Mich.App. 437,443-444,543 N.W.2d 25 (1995). When deciding a motion

brought under this section, a Court considers only the pleadings. MeR 2.116(G)(5). However,

in actions based on contract, the Court may examine the writing in conjunction with the motion.

3


4/47

Second Bent Harbor. v. St. Paul Title Ins. Co., 126 Mich. App. 580 (1983). Where a motion is

brought under MCR 2.1 16(C)(8), the trial court should liberally permit the parties to amend

their pleadings unless amendment "would not bejustified. " MCR 2.116(I)(5).

PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE IS TO ASK FOR LEAVE TO AMEND

Here, the Plaintiffs do not simply rest on their challenged pleading, but rather will file a

motion within two weeks from today's date for Leave of this Court to Amend their Complaint.

This is necessitated not only by Defendant Orlans' Motion but also because of a change in the

law in the State of Michigan affecting all MERS' mortgages and because of the deposition of

Marshal Isaacs taken by Plaintiffs' attorney in another similar case in which Marshall Isaacs

executed an Assignment as an Assistant Secretary and Vice President ofMERS. See and

compare Isaacs Exhibits 3 and 5 attached to his Transcript. In that case, Eaman Shina et al. vs.

Federal National Mortgage Association et al, Oakland County Circuit Court Case No. 10-

107260-CK assigned to the Honorable Judge Rae Lee Chabot, a deposition was conducted but

thwarted by Defendants. Plaintiffs attach the transcript and Exhibits as part of this Motion to

show that amendment of their Complaint is justified and will supply factual information and

specific details not contained in their challenged pleading.

PLAINTIFFS WERE CERTAINLY OWED A DUTY BY ORLANS

Orlans uses sleight of hand to say that " ... it is clear that Orlans Associates, P.C. is a lawfirm

retained to handle the foreclosure and oversee the redemption." First, the MERSCORP INC.

Rules of Membership, specifically Rule 3, Section 3 (a) permits only Officers of its Members to

serve as its "certifying officers", specifically as its "Assistant Secretaries and Vice Presidents."

4


5/47

See Isaacs Transcript at page 15, Line 22 through page 19, Line 12. See also Exhibit 7 attached

to Isaacs' transcript. Also see Rule 10 of Exhibit

This concept and Rule that wIERS certifying officers (its Assistant Secretaries and Vice

Presidents) was recently reiterated by R.K. on November 18,2010 in his testimony as President

and CEO of both MERSCORP, INC. "and its subsidiary, Mortgage Electronic Registration

Systems, Inc." Isaacs Exhibit 8 at page 5. "'MERS has specific controls over who can be

identified by its members as a certifying officer.

To be a MERS certifying officer, one must be a company officer ofthe member institution, have

basic knowledge ofMERS, and pass a certifying examination administered by MERS.n Isaacs

Exhibit 8 at 13. See also Transcript at page 20, Line 7 through page 23, Line 10.

Mr. Arnold also testified that "Earlier this year, when we became aware of acceleration ill tile

foreclosure document processing, we grew concerned that some certifying officers might have

been pressured toperform their responsibilities ill a manner inconsistent witiz Ollr Rules."

Isaacs Transcript at page 23, linesll through 18. See Exhibit 8 at page 3. Arnold continued his

congressional testimony: "When we discovered that some so-called robe-signers were MERS

certifying officers, we suspended their authority until they could be retrained and retested. Isaacs

MERS is not the mortgagee. Exhibit 8, at page 12. Also see Exhibit 8 page 42 through 44 which

Transcript at page 23, Lines 11 through 25. Arnold also testified about certified officers being

"the same officers whom the lenders and servicers use to carry out these functions even when

Mr. Arnolds answer to a question he was asked to answer, specifically, How does one become a

Vice President andlor Assistant Secretary ofMERS? What Compensation do they receive?

Approximately how many Vice Presidents and/or Assistant Secretaries does MERS have? What

is MERS policy on conflicts of interest regarding Vice Presidents and/or Assistant Secretaries

5


6/47

that are employed by banks or investors that they may have other conflicting interests in a

mortgage loan?

On page 42, Arnold testifies that: "Certifying Officers conduct much of the business of Mortgage

Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. These individuals are employees and officers ofMERS

members who are appointed as limited officers of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems,

Inc. with the title of vice president and/or assistant secretary by means of a corporate resolution."

Isaacs Exhibit 8 at 42. See also pages 42 and 43 for the rest of this testimony. Finally, on page

44, Arnold testified that "[ a]s of November 20, 2010, MERS has 20,302 certifying officers who

work with the more than 31 million active loans registered on the MERS System." Exhibit 10 is

a Report of the Congressional Oversight Panel dated November 16, 2010 concerning the

mortgage foreclosure documentation scandal. It speaks of robo-signing

Admissions of large lenders that employees and contractors "testified that they signed, and in

some cases backdated, thousands of document claiming personal knowledge of facts about

mortgages that they did not actually know to be true. Exhibit 11 at page 4 and in other places in

the Report. On pages 16 through 22, the Report specifically focused on the role of MERS in the

crisis and also the role ofMERS in the securitization problems identified in the Report. Exhibit

11 is the recent Michigan Court of Appeals case of Residential Funding, Co.LLC vs. Saurman, --

-N.W.2D- - - (2011); 201 I WL 1516819.

In Residential Funding, two consolidated cases involved two separate foreclosures instituted by

Nortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS), the mortgagee in both cases. After

tbese foreclosures each assignment was quit claimed by MERS to a third party and not to the

original lender.

6


7/47

The sole question presented was whether MERS is an entity that qualifies under MeL

600.3204(1)(d) to Foreclose by Advertisement on the subject properties or ifit must instead seek

foreclosure by Michigan's judicial process. The Court held that MERS may not foreclose by

advertisement and any Foreclosure by Advertisement conducted by MERS is void ab initio

(meaning void at the time the foreclosure took place and not at the time it was declared by the

Court to be void.)

The Residential Funding Court analyzed the type of mortgage and note in each case and the

analysis reflects precisely the type of mortgage in tins case.

Each note provided for the amount of the loan, the interest rate, methods andrequirements of repayment, the identity of the lender and borrower and the like. Themortgage instrument provided for rights of foreclosure of the property by the mortgageein the event of default on the loan. The lender, though named as the lender in themortgage security instrument, was not designated therein as the mortgagee. Instead, themortgage stated that the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc ("MERS") "is themortgagee under this Security Instrument" and it contained several provisions addressingthe relationship between MERS and the lender including:

"MERS" is Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc. MERS is a separatecorporation that is acting solely as a nominee for Lender and Lender's successors

and assigns. MERS is the mortgagee under this Security Instrument.* **This Security Instrument secures to Lender: (i) the repayment of the Loan, and allrenewals, extensions and modifications of the Note; and (ii) the performance ofBorrower's covenants and agreements under this Security Instrument and the Note. Forthis purpose, Borrower does hereby mortgage, warrant, grant and convey to MERS(solely as nominee for Lender and Lender's successors and assigns) and to the successorsand assigns ofMERS, with the power of sale, the following described property ....Borrower understands and agrees that MERS holds only legal title to the interests grantedby Borrower in this Security Instrument, but, if necessary to comply with law or custom,MERS (as nominee for Lender and Lender's successors and assigns) has the right: to

exercise any or all of those interests, including, but not limited to, the right to forecloseand sell the Property; and to take any action required of Lender including, but not limitedto, releasing and canceling this Security Instrument.

This language is idelltical to the Mortgage in the case at bar. Tills is commonly referred to by

MERS itself as a MOM mortgage (Mers as Original Mortgagee).

7


8/47

Residential Funding noted:

The record evidence establishes that MERS owned neither thenotes, nor an interest, legal share, or right in the notes. The only interest MERSpossessed was in the properties through the mortgages. Given that the notes andmortgages are separate [page 5] documents, evidencing separate obligations and

interests, MERS' interest in the mortgage didnot give it an interest in the debt

I e ! . at 5 & 6.

MERS cannot assign a mortgage without assigning the Note and it cannot assign the

Note. The United States Supreme Court held long ago that: "The note and mortgage are

inseparable; the former as essential, the latter as an incident. An assignment of the note carries

the mortgage with it, while an assignment of the latter alone is a nullity." Carpenter v. Logan, 83

U.S. 271, 274 (1872).

Applying Residential Funding to the case at bar, it is clear that MERS cannot assign

something it does not have. It cannot assign a Note because the Court of Appeals ruled

that ..... MERS owned neither the notes, nor an interest, legal share, or right in the notes. The

only interest MERS possessed was in the properties through the mortgages. Given that the notes

and mortgages are separate [page 5] documents, evidencing separate obligations and interests,

MERS' interest in the mortgage did not give it an interest in the debt."Id

Wherefore, Plaintiffs ask this court to permit them to amend their complaint within two

(2) weeks from today's date.

/1 /~ / J __ated: May 23,2011Ziyad iased (P72237)Attorney for Plaintiffs625 East Big Beaver Road, Suite 205Troy, Michigan 48083(248) 680-7300

8


9/47

MARSHALL ISAACSMay 13, 2011

1 STATE OF MICHIGAN

2 SIXTH CIRCUIT COURT

3 OAKLAND COUNTY

4

5 EAMAN SHINA, FARIS SHINA,

6 Individuals,

7 Plaintiffs,

Page 1

8 VS. Case No. 10-107260

9 Hon. Rae Lee Chabot

10 FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

11 BAC HOME LOANS, SERVICING, LP, a

12 Foreign Corporation, MORTGAGE

13 ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.,

14 a Foreign Corporation,

15 Defendants.

16

17

18

19 The Deposition of MARSHALL ISAACS,

20 Taken at 1650 West Big Beaver Road,

Troy, Michigan,.21

22Commencing at 1:57 p.m.,

23 Friday, May 13, 2011,

Before Alison C. Matthes, CSR-6266, RPR.24

25

6J.~}~r~(t!IQ;~IS;'11.\'lv,lir!ml~n:::;l(JeLr:tifn


10/47

Page 2


1 APPEARANCES:

2

3 ZIYAD KASED

4 625 East Big Beaver Road

5 Suite 205

6 Troy, Michigan 48083

7 248.680.7300

8 Appearing on behalf of the Plaintiffs.

9

10 MICHELLE T. THOMAS

11 Bodman, PLC

12 1901 Saint Antoine

13 Sixth El oor

14 Detroit, Michigan 48226

15 313.393.7508

16 Appearing on behalf of the Defendants.

17

18 TIMOTHY B. MYERS

19 Orlans Associates, P.C.

20 1650 West Big Beaver Road

21 Troy, Michigan 48084

22 248.502.1362

23 Appearing on behalf of Marshall Isaacs.

24

25

6J..~J~~,~~I9S;,tSl".'ln\:hi r.nun 'l1(ICk.t~tltn


11/47

Page 3

MARSHALL ISAACSMay 13 , 2011

13 (Exhibits attached to transcript.)

10

11

12

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

3 Witness Page

4 MARSHALL ISAACS

5

6 EXAMINATION

7 BY MR. KASED: 5

8

9 EXHIBITS

Exhibit Page

DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 1 5











0I;'~~1~~I9;~,!~ . . '1 . ' \ . "VI , .h i r :n l :n=. lnd:xJHn


12/47

Page 4


10

11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 12 5

'1e: DEPOSITION EXHIBIT 13 5



5

6

7

8

9

~Itl~~rQS~IS;,nn"-',hif;n'~n~IClr:k.~:ljrn


13/47


1 Troy, Michigan

2 Friday, May 13, 2011

3 1:57 p.m.

4

5 MARSHALL ISAACS,

6 was thereupon called as a witness herein, and after

7 having first been duly sworn to testify to the truth,

8 the whole truth and nothing but the truth, was

9 examined and testified as follows:

10 MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION:

11 DEPOSITION EXHIBITS 1-15

12 1:57 p.m.

13 MR. KASED: Let the record reflect this is

14 the deposition of Marshall Isaacs as assistant

15 secretary and vice president of Mortgage Electronic16 Registration Systems, Inc., taken pursuant to order of

17 the court after a motion for protective order was

18 sought.

19 This deposition is being taken for any and

20 all purposes authorized by the Michigan Court Rules.

21 This case is in t h e Circuit Court for Oakland County,

case number 10-107260-CK. It's in front of Judge2

23 Rae Lee Chabot.

24 EXAMINATION

25 BY MR. KASED:

~IENENSTOCI(: - ' :_J-:rJOt. .JWIUl;em 'In ImP J JliTU-a~


14/47


11

12

13

14

1516

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Isaacs.

A. Hello.

Q. I know that you're an attorney. Have you, yourself,

participated in depositions as an attorney before?

A. I have testified at depositions, yes.

Q. Okay. Did it involve Mortgage Electronic Registration

Systems, do you recall?

A. No.

Q. I understand that you're familiar with depositions,

but I'm just going to go over a few ground rules so

the record in this case is clear. There is a court

reporter sitting next to you. She's taking down every

word that you or I or either of the attorneys sitting

here says. To make her job easier and for record

clarity, I'll ask that you do not speak while I'mspeaking, and I'll do my best to not speak while

you're speaking_

I'm going to ask you some questions. If

you don't understand the questions, let me know and

I'll ask it a different way. If you don't know the

answer to a question, just say you don't know_ If you

need to go to the restroom or if you need a break for

any reason, let me know and we'll accommodate that. I

just ask that if there is a question pending, I'd like

the question answered before we take a break.

~ f .% 1 i& J3 r J ;:Q ;~ IS',n.... 'w.bif:I1!!n"lI(II:k.l:JJIrI

Page 6


15/47

MARSHALL ISAACS

May 13, 2011

1

2

3

4

5 A.

6 Q.

7

8

9 nrl

10 Q.

11

12

13 A.

14

15 Q.

16 A.

17 Q.

18

19 A.

20 Q.

21

22

23

24

25

Mr. Isaacs, are you under the influence of

any medication for any condition that might affect

your ability to provide accurate answers to my

questions today?

No.

Mr. Isaacs, you are a vice president and assistant

secretary of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems;

correct?

Through signed documents, yes, I was given that title.

And hereinafter, I'm just going to refer to them as

MERS, if that's okay. Do you know since when you held

that title? In what year you got that title?

I believe the authority for me to sign documents was

given in 2009 for BAC.

And MERS is a nationwide company; correct?

I don't know.

Do you know on about how many mortgages they're listed

as mortgagee?

I have no idea.

Can you generally describe what MERS does?

i"lS. THOIvlAS: abjection. That r s not one of

the four topics that is listed in the Order that we're

going to -- as topics for deposition today.

MR. RASED: Noted.

MR. MYERS: I would join in that objection.

~!.;tl~~'IQ~!Sh,,\,,"w.hir~m:n;lnd~.r:rjm

Page 7


16/47


1 And, in fact -- in fact, I'm going to take the extra

2 step and instruct my witness not to answer any

3 questions that are outside of what Judge Chabot has

4 ordered. It's my understanding, and what my witness

5 has been prepared to testify to, is in accordance with

6 what Judge Chabot's Order specifically outlines, and

7 that March 31st, 2011 order is quite clear that the

8 plaintiffs are entitled to depose Marshall R. Isaacs

9 with respect to the following topics only, and that

10 would be the authority to sign -- his authority to

11 sign as an assistant secretary and vice president of

12 MERS, his employment history with MERS, MERS corporate

13 resolution authorizing him to sign documents as an

14 assistant secretary and vice president of MERS, and

15 the Assignment of Mortgage dated January 3rd, 2010,

16 and recorded on January 20th, 2011.

17 Outside of that, Counsel, we're not

18 obligated and we're not going to be answering any

19 questions outside the scope of this Order.

20 MR. KASED: Okay. The question was to

21 Mr. Isaacs, if he can describe what MERS does. Are

22 you instructing him not to answer?

23 MR. MYERS: I am instructing him not to

24 answer because that's not within the scope of

Judge Chabot's Order.5

~II~tIJ:Q;~t*,S;~.",n'd~il;nj~n,t.I.nt:k.r:fJI[l

Page 8


17/47


1

2

3

MR. KASED: Okay.

MS. THOMAS: And I would be joining in that

instruction, as well.

4 BY MR. KASED:

18

19

20

2122

23

24

25

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

A.

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

Q.

A.

Q. How did you become an assistant secretary and vice

president of MERS?

A. The issue of getting assignments prepared and executed

quickly, I guess, facilitated the giving of --

assigning authority by HERS and the BAC to the varlOUS

law firms to get the -- sign some mortgage -- signed

quicker, so MERS, along with BAC, granted signing

authority to the various law firms who do the

foreclosures so that they could, basically, assign the

assignments.

Q. So did you fill out an application?

A. No.

Q. Did you receive any training?

No.

Do you have any business cards that show that youJre a

vice president and assistant secretary of MERS?

No.

Are you paid by MERS at all?

No.

Do you attend any meetings? MERS meetings?

No.

gIENENSTOCI(: \! ,' :' : l' I flNWILHi CO llin ru~It:H~TlI":{ . : - . . rU JEOw,,\\,\.hf l:nj:n:=:tDd~.com

Page 9


18/47


18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

A.

Q.

A.

Q.

Q. Do you report to anyone at MERS?

A. No.

Q. Do you recall who asked you to accept that position?

A. No.

Q. r'm going to place in front of you, Mr. Isaacs,

exhibits that were labeled Exhibits 1, 2 and 3. I'll

direct your attention to Exhibit 1, entitled,

Agreement For Signing Authority. Do you know what

this is?

A. This would be the agreement that MERS gave to allow me

to sign documents -- assignments on their behalf.

Q. Have you seen this document before today?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. Okay. Exhibit 2 is entitled, MERS, Inc., Corporate

Resolution; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Have you seen this document before today?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. And Exhibit 3 is entitled, Assignment of Mortgage, and

it's concerning the plaintiffs in this case, Mr. and

Ms. Shina; correct?

Yes.

And that is your signature?

Yes, it is.

And you signed it as assistant secretary and vice

0I,I:iJ,~IQ;~,~~www .hl r.nnn 1: . .1n r- l. .c r .m

Page 10


19/47


1

2

3 A.

4 Q.

5

6 A.

7 Q.

8

9 A.

10 Q.

11 A.

12 Q.

13

14 A.

15 Q.

16

17 A.

18 Q.

19 A.

20 Q.

21

22

23

24 A.

25 Q.

president of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems;

correct?

Yes, I did.

And that assignment was prepared and drafted by you as

an attorney for Orlans & Associates; correct?

Correct.

This document was sworn to by you and notarized by a

notary on January 3rd, 2010; correct?

No. I signed it on January 3rd, 2010.

That's what I said.

Oh, I'm sorry. Yes.

Do you have any actual recollection of what happened

that day?

No.

And the effective date of the assignment is on or

before January3rd, 2010; correct?

Yes.

And is there a date by your signature?

Just above it there is, and just below it there is.

So this document was drafted by you as an attorney for

Orlans & Associates, and then signed by you as

assistant secretary and vice president pursuant to a

corporate resolution; is that correct?

Correct.

And that corporate resolution is what we have marked

~n~~R1~,I.Q;~I5~n\"l..\'+11rr:nlm;lni~k.c:l,rn

Page 11


20/47


17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

A.

Q .

A.

Q.

as Exhibit 2; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Can you explain how an assignment of a mortgage that

was signed by you and notarized on January 3rd, become

effective on or before the date it is actually

notarized?

A. I donlt understand your question.

Q. Okay. The assignment was signed by you and notarized

on January 3rd, but the effective date says, on or

before January 3rd. Can you explain how this

assignment can be effective before the date it was

actually signed and notarized?

A. Well, an assignment is nothing more than a document

that gives notice to the world that the mortgage

interest has been transferred. Mortgage interest can

be~ransferredprior to the recording assignment by

other documentation.

Q. Move on to Exhibit 4. This document is the mortgage

for the plaintiffs in this case, Mr. and Ms. Shina;

correct?

It is a mortgage for the Shinas, yes.

Do you recognize that document at all? Have you seen

it before?

It doesnlt look familiar.

But that is the same mortgage that you assigned from

~I.!t[R!tIlrg;~I~S;.'"\\"'w.bi[~nl!n;lnd~.t:Jjm

Page 12


21/47


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

MERS to BAC Horne Loan Servicing?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay. Exhibit 5.

MS. THOMAS: I'm going to object to any

questions regarding Exhibit 5. This is not the

assignment that's listed in the Order under section

under paragraph B. This is an assignment regarding

borrowers who are not plaintiffs to this, and it's not

regarding the subject property, so I would instruct

him not to answer any questions regarding Exhibit 5 as

it's not one of the authorized deposition topics

according to the Court's Order.

MR. MYERS: I would join with Ms. Thomas.

MR. KASED: Let the record reflect that

15 Counsel has instructed the witness not to answer any

16 questions regarding Exhibit 5.

17 BY MR. KASED:

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Q.

A.

Q.

Q. Mr. Isaacs, regarding Exhibit 3, the assignment of the

mortgage in this case, do you recall if the notary was

in your presence when she signed this?

'1\n I don't recall.

Do you have any specific recollection of signing the

document?

No.

Mr. Isaacs, are you aware of the term robo-sign?

~I~,Ii&~~I:Q;~,!~t',"\"'\\'r;rJm

Page 13


22/47


1

2

3

4

MS. THOMAS: I 'm going to object. That is

not one of the authorized topics in the Court Order,

and instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.

5 BY MR. KASED:

MR. MYERS: I would join.

6

7

8

9

10

11

Q. To your knowledge, does or has Bank of America or any

of its affiliates ever engaged in robo-signing?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. That's not one of

the authorized topics underneath the Court's Order. I

would instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.


12 BY MR. KASED:

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

13

14

15

16

17

A.

Q.

A.

Q.

Q. Okay. Exhibit 6. Do you recognize this document,

Mr. Isaacs?

A. I don't recognize it, but I can tell you what it is.

Q. Go ahead.

A. It's the note executed by Eaman Shina.

Q. And, so, would that be the note which is secured by

the mortgage identified as Exhibit 4?

Yes.

Turn your' attention back to Exhibit 3 for a second.

You assigned only the mortgage; is that correct?

The assignment states: "Together with the note to

which the same is collateral."

So is there a reference to the note in Exhibit 3?

~J . }2~e r t ! r. l I .Q ;~ I~S",,,\,,~.bi~~1 !nslDr.k.r!J' nn

Page 14


23/47

Page 15


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

A. There is.

Q. Can you read it to me?

A. "Together with the note to which the same is

collateral."

Q. Do you know if MERS has any interest in that

promissory note?


the topics underneath the Court Order. I would

instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.MR. MYERS: I would join.

11 BY MR. KASED:

15

16

17

12

13

14

18

19

Q. Mr. Isaacs, if I told you that MERS had no interest in

the Shinas' promissory note, which is Exhibit 6, would

you agree that MERS cannot assign the promissory note

as you did in Exhibit 3?


the topics authorized by the Court's Order. I

instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.

MR. MYERS: I would join. I would also

20 object on the basis of speculation.

21 BY MR. KASED:

22

23

24

25

Q. Okay. Exhibit 7. Can you tell me what that document

is titled, Mr. Isaacs?

A. MERSCORP, Inc. Rules of Membership.

Q. And as a VP of MERS, you've surely seen this before;

~I,~t~~IQ.~I~;.n1."'\'I.".hi,:III:-n"ilnd:.C/lm


24/47

Page 16MARSHALL ISAACSMay 13, 2011

1

2

3

4

5

6

correct?

MS. THOMAS: I'm going to object. Rules of

membership is not a deposition topic authorized by the

Court's Order. I'm going to instruct Mr. Isaacs not

to answer.


7 BY MR. KASED:

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

8

9

Q. Mr. Isaacs, can you turn to page 15 of this r which

would be the second page? Section 3, under Rule 3,

can you read that for me?

A. Out loud or to myself?

Q. For the record. Ou~ loud, please.

A. "Section 3 (a): Upon request from the member,

Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. shall

promptly furnish to the member in accordance with

procedures a corporate resolution designating one or

more officers of such member selected by such member

as certifying officers of Mortgage Electronic

Registration Systems Inc., to permit such mernber , (i),

to release the lien of any mortgage registered on the

HERS system to such member.

(ii), assign the lien of any mortgage

naming MERS as the mortgager when the member is also

the current promissory note-holder, or if the mortgage

is registered on the MERS system, is shown to be

~IB:.l~&l~~IQ~~,~SWi.\"1.\o


25/47


1 registered to the member.

2 (iii), to foreclose upon the property

3 securing any mortgage loan registered on the MERS

4 system to such member.

5 (iv), to take any and all actions necessary

6 to protect the interest of the member or the

7 beneficial owner of a mortgage loan in any bankruptcy

8 proceeding regarding a loan registered on the MERS

9 system that is shown to be registered to the member.

10 (v), to take such actions as may be

11 necessary to fulfill such member servicing obligations

12 to the beneficial owner of such mortgage loans,

13 including mortgage loans that are removed from the

14 MERS system as a result of the transfer thereof to a

15 nonmember.

16 (vi), to take action and execute all

17 necessary documents, all documents necessary to

18 finance, refinance r amend or modify any mortgage loan

19 registered on the MERS system to such member.

20 (vii), endorse checks made payable to MERS,

21 to the member that are r-ece i.ved by the member and

22 payment on any mortgage loan registered on the MERS

23 system that is shown to be registered to the member r

24 and instances where Mortgage Electronic Registration

Systems Inc' r designates an officer or a member as a5

~I~t{%l~,IQ;~IIS\'\'\\."\\.ll~l:nl!r.;IIlr.k.r::jln

Page 17


26/47


13

14

15

16

17

18

19

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

certifying officer of MERS for the limited purpose

described above, such member shall indemnify MERS and

any of its employees, directors, officers, agents or

affiliates against all loss, liability and expenses

which may" -- "they may sustain as a result of any

and all actions taken by such certifying officer."

Q. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Now, in the third line of what you read,

starting on section 3, it specifically refers to a

"corporate resolution designating one or more officers

of such member, selected by such member, as certifying

officers of MERS."

Do you see that?

A. Yes.

Q. Are you an officer of BAC Home Loan Servicing?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. That's not a topic

that's listed in the Court's Order. I would instruct

Mr. Isaacs not to answer.

MR. MYERS: I join.

20 BY MR. KASED:

21

22

23

24

25

Q. Are you employed by BAC?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. You can depose

Mr. Isaacs on his employment history with MERS.

There's no other employment history that you're

allowed to depose him on, according to the Court's

~I'JitlIIQ~J~Swwwhlnnunstock.cnm


27/47


1 Order. I'm going to instruct Mr. Isaacs not to

2 answer.

3 MR. MYERS; I join.

4 BY MR. KASED:

5 Q. Mr. Isaacs, do you know of any authority in the MERS

6 rules that authorizes corporate resolutions appointing

7 certifying officers of MERS to be attorneys for law

8 firms who work for the MERS members?

9 MS. THOMAS: Objection. That's not one of

10 the topics in the Court's Order. I'm going to

11 instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.

12 MR. MYERS: I join.

13 BY MR. KASED:

14 Q. Mr. Isaacs, you just read a very specific -- "although

15 limited powers of certified officers within the MERS

16 rules."

17 Can you compare these to those listed in

18 the corporate resolution in Exhibit 2? And feel free

19 to take your time.

20 MR. MYERS: I'm going to object to the

question. I think it's vague and ambiguous. I'm not1

22 sure the witness understands. I certainly don't.

23 MS. THOMAS: And we've already made the

24 objection as to Exhibit 7 and we've instructed

Mr. Isaacs not to answer any questions with respect to5

~I~tipa~I.9~~,!Sw'\, ' \ \" .bi[:n '!nGlnr.k.r:r l tr t


28/47


1

2

3

4

5

6

Exhibit 7 because it's not within the topics listed ln

the Court's Order as topics that you are allowed to

depose Mr. Isaacs on.

MR. KASED: Are you instructing him not to

answer my question?

7 BY MR. KASED:

MS. THOMAS: Yes, I am.

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

Q. Exhibit 8. Mr. Isaacs, can you tell me what this

document is entitled?A. It's entitled, Remarks and Testimony of R.K. Arnold,

President and CEO of MERSCORP, Inc., Before the

Subcommittee on Housing and Community Opportunity

House Financial Services Committee, November 18th,

2010.

Q. Have you ever seen this document before?

A. I have not.

Q. Do you know who R.K. Arnold is?

A. According to this, he's president and CEO of MERSCORP,

Inc.

Q. Have you heard of him before today?

A. No.

Q. Do you know the difference between MERS and MERSCORP?

MR. MYERS: Objection. That's not one of

the topics authorized in the Court's Order. I would


0JJ2~1i.,I.Q~rtS.","''\yw.bll~n-E~n~lnr:k.~:nlT1

Page 20


29/47

MARSHALL ISAACSMay 13 t 2011

1 BY MR. KASED:

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Q. Page 2 of Exhibit 8 t the second and third paragraphs,

can you read that for the record?

A. "One thing that is always clear in a mortgage document

is that if the borrower defaults on his obligation,

the lender can foreclose. If MERS holds the mortgage

lean, foreclosures can occur in two ways: Either the

MERS mortgage interest is reassigned in the land

records to the lender holding the note and the lender

initiates the action on its own, or MERS initiates the

action as the mortgagee of record in the land records.

To do this, MERS relies on specifically

designated employees of its members, called certifying

officers, to handle the foreclosure. To be a MERS

certifying officer, one must be an officer of the

member institution who is familiar with the functions

to be performed, and who has passed an examination

administered by MERS. Generally, these are the same

individuals who handle the foreclosure if the lender

was involved without MERS. The loan.file remains with

the servicer as it did before MERS. MERS is not a

repository for mortgage documents or promissory

notes."

Q. Thank you.

So on November 18th, 2010, the president of

0n~~B(tJ,~lrQ;~IS\\,,,\I,,, .. ~.llip.nnn:'lad~.':rJm

Page 21


30/47


1 MERS testified under oath to Congress that to be a

2 MERS certifying officer, one must be an officer of the

3 member institution who's familiar with the functions

4 to be performed and who has passed an examination

5 administered by MERS. Have you taken any examination

6 administered by MERS?

7 MS. THOMAS: Objection. There is no -- the

8 Court Order does not authorize testimony on that

9 topic. I would instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.10 MR. MYERS: I wound join. And I would also

11 add that I believe you're misconstruing this exhibit.

12 Page 42 specifically takes the testimony of Mr. Arnold

13 and extrapolates that as to how does one become a vice

14 president and/or assistant secretary of MERS. I think

15 this is far outside the scope of what Judge Chabot's

16 Order addresses.

17 BY MR. KASED:

18 Q. Mr. Arnold testified that, "The certifying officers

19 are the same individuals who would handle the

20 foreclosure if the lender was involved without MERS.

21 The loan file remains with the servicer as it did

22 before MERS.n

23 Do you remember, when you executed the

24 assignment in Exhibit 3, did you have the loan file?

MR. MYERS: I'm going to object. This has5

0J..ljBJiIQ;~IS; r " ! ' \ , , " ' \ \ _b i f~JH!ni ' i IGd: . . r : r J rn

Page 22


31/47


1 been asked and answered. Mr. Isaacs has already

2 testified that he has no recollection of this specific

3 file when he signed the assignment.

4 THE WITNESS: Do I answer?

5 MR. KASED: Is that a no? Can he answer

6 the question?

7 MR. MYERS: If you recall. If you can

8 answer the question.

9 A. I don't recall signing the assignment, so I don't

10 know.

11 BY MR. KASED:

12 Q. Page 3 of Exhibit 8, Mr. Isaacs, can you read the

13 second paragraph into the record?

14 A. "Earlier this year, when we became aware of

15 acceleration in the foreclosure document processing,

16 we grew concerned that some certifying officers might

17 have been pressured to perform their responsibilities

18 in a manner inconsistent with our rules. When we did

19 not get the assurances that we thought were

20 appropriate to keep this from happening, we suspended

21 our relationships with those companies.

22 When we discovered that some so-called

23 robo-signers were MERS certifying officers, we

24 suspended their authority until they could be

25 retrained and retested. We are asking our members to

6 . ! : i&1~ l I9 ;~ I !S,..w'\"-.hir;nnr.r.lm:L:.r.rJm

Page 23


32/47


11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

provide us with specific plans outlining how they

intend to prevent such actions in the future."

Q. Thank you.

And one more thing on page 13, just those

first two sentences.

A. "MERS has specific controls over who can be identified

by its members as a certifying officer. To be a MERS

certifying officer, one must be a company officer of

the member institution, have basic kriowl.edqe of ['1ERS

and pass a certified examination administered by

MERS.n

Q. And I have attempted to ask you if you are an officer

of the member institution, if you've passed an

examination administered by MERS, which your counsel

has instructed you not to answer. Do you know what a

MOM mortgage is?

A. A MOM?


the topics that the Court has authorized for

Mr. Isaacs to testify to. I would instruct Mr. Isaacs

21 not to answer.

22 BY MR. KASED:

23

24

25

Q. Do you know what a MIN number is?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. MIN number is not

a topic that's authorized by the Court Order. I would

~I~J:~I%(~,IQ;~,!Swww.hinnenstock.cnrn
http://www.hinnenstock.cnrn/http://www.hinnenstock.cnrn/


33/47



2 BY MR. KASED:

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Q. Back to Exhibit 4 r Mr. Isaacs. Did you see the MIN

number towards the top right?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you have any idea why that particular

identification number was not included in the

assignment of the mortgage, Exhibit 3?

A. I can only speculate, so I don't know offhand.

Probably because --

MR. MYERS: Well, I'm going to instruct the

witness not to answer this. If you cannot testify

we're here for you to answer honestlYr fully and

completelYr and if you don't know the answer r one of

the things that Mr. Kased stopped short of during his

instructions to you, as is routinely -- as witnesses

are routinely advised, and that is that if you don't

know the answer to a question, I don't know r I don't

remember r I don't recall, are generally accepted

answers.

Mr. Kased, is that one of the ground rules

that you are comfortable with?

MR. KASED: Yes. I believe I told

Mr. Isaacs that if he didn't know an answer, he could

answer I don't know.

0I,tiJl~f[9;~ISwww.biennnxtouk.cnm

Page 25
http://www.biennnxtouk.cnm/http://www.biennnxtouk.cnm/


34/47


16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

1 MR. MYERS: Fair enough.

2 A. I don1t know.

3 BY MR. KASED:

4 Okay. Fair enough..

5 Do you know the purpose of the MIN number?

6 MS. THOMAS: Objection. MIN numbers are

7 not a topic authorized by the Court 1s Order. I would


9 BY l'1R. KASED:10 Q. Mr- Isaacs, do you know what a milestone report is?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. Milestone reports

is not a topic authorized by the Court's Order. I

would instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.

BY MR. KASED:

11

12

13

14

15 Q. Mr. Isaacs, on page 16 of Exhibit 8, can you just read

the first two sentences?

A. In 2005, it became apparent to us that foreclosures

undertaken in Florida were relying excessively on lost

note affidavits. MERS adopted a rule forbidding the

use of lost note affidavits when foreclosures were

done in the name of MERS in Florida. That rule was

extended nationally in 2006, and is still in effect

today. MERS believes --

Q. That's it. That's all.

A. I'm sorry.

0!'t[~rtiJ:Q~J!S\\-~\'"\\.birmlm:;lfld:.!:rJm


35/47


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Q . Thank you. I appreci a t e tha t .

Af t er readi ng thos e s t a t ement s , Mr. I s aacs ,

doesn ' t t ha t comple t e ly go aga i ns t your corpora te

res olut i on i n Exh i bi t 2?

A. I don ' t unders tand the ques t i on.

Q. Okay. In your corpora te res olut i on , you were

author i zed to execute los t note a ffi davi t s ; i s tha t

correc t?

A. I t does s ta t e tha t those can be s i gned, yes .

Q . All ri g h t . Ye t the pres i dent of MERS tes t i f i ed to

Cong res s unde r oa th tha t MERS adopted a rule

forbidding the use of los t note a ff i davi ts .

MS. THOMAS: Object i on . Los t note

a ffi davi t s i s not a s ubject authori zed by the Cour t ' s

Orde r. I would i ns t ruct Mr. Is aacs not to answer

ques t i ons rega rding los t note aff i davi t s .

MR. MYERS: I would joi n .

18 BY MR. KASED:

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Q.

A.

Okay . Exhi bi t 9 . I know tha t ' s a l i t t le di f f i cul t t o

read, Mr. I s aacs . Th i s was a l i s t obta ined from the

t " lERSv.Jebs i te tha t l i s t s a ll the act i ve t J !ERSmembers .

I 've pr i nt ed the as , and I know i t ' s a l i t t le bi t ha rd

to read, but do you s ee the name Orlans Associa t es

anywhere?

I do not s ee i t .

6I~~Fa~,IQ;~,*Swww.hlnnnnsmnk.cnrn

Page 27
http://www.hlnnnnsmnk.cnrn/http://www.hlnnnnsmnk.cnrn/


36/47


10

11

12

13

14

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Q. Exhibit 10. Mr. Isaacs, this is the oversight report

dated November 16, 2010. Have you ever seen this

document?

A. No.

Q. Were you aware that Congress became aware that

employees at Bank of America and others had testified

that they signed and, in some cases, backdated

thousands of documents claiming personal knowledge?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. This is not a

topic authorized by the Court's Order. I'm going to


MR. MYERS: I join. I also would object

based on the witness's lack of knowledge regarding

this, so lack of foundation.

15 BY MR. KASED:

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Q. Mr. Isaacs, page 4 of exhibit 10, can you read the

first paragraph for the record?

MR. MYERS: I'm going to object to the --

we've given you a lot of leeway on the reading into

the record. Exhibit 10 is a part of the record. It's

been aduitted as part of the deposition. The contents

of it, both the first paragraph, as well as the

remaining pages in this, speak for themselves. And if

you have a specific question regarding -- actually,

I'm going to object to anything regarding this because

~I.it!&.l~Ir.Q~!Swww.binnnnsrcnk.rnm

Page 28
http://www.binnnnsrcnk.rnm/http://www.binnnnsrcnk.rnm/


37/47

Page 29


1 the wi tnes s has i ndica t ed that he ' s never s een th i s ,

2 he has no knowledge of th i s document , and i t ' s out s i de

3 of the s cope of Judge Chabot ' s Orde r.

4 MR. KASED: Okay. I ' l l read i t for the

5 record .

6 "In the fa ll of 2010, report s began to

7 surface al leg i ng that companie s se rvi ci ng

8 $6.4 t r i l l i on i n Ameri can mortgages may have been

9 bypas sed leg al ly" -- "may have" -- excuse me -- "may

10 have bypass ed leg al ly requi red s t eps to foreclose on a

11 home. Employees or contrac tors of Bank of Ameri ca ,

12 GMAC mortgage and othe r major loan se rvi cers t es t i f i ed

13 that they s igned and, i n s ome cas es backdated ,

14 thousands of documents cla iming persona l knowledge of

15 fact s about mortg ages tha t they di d not actua lly know

16 to be t rue . "

17 BY MR. KASED:

18 Q. Okay. Exhi bi t 11. Mr. Is aacs , Exh ibi t 11 i s a recent

19 Michi gan Court of Appeals case i nvolving MERS, and i t

20 holds tha t , "MERS cannot foreclos e by adver t i s ement i n

21 Mich ig an, and that any MERS foreclosures in Michi gan

22 by HERS" -- "by adver t i s ement i s void as an i s s ue ."

23 Are you fami li a r wi th th i s cas e a t a ll?

24 A. Yes .

Q. Have you read the opi ni on?5

0I~,~,tirg;~ISwww.hfnuunstuck.cnm
http://www.hfnuunstuck.cnm/http://www.hfnuunstuck.cnm/


38/47


1 A. I have.

2 Q. Do you recall anywhere in the opinion where it states

3 that MERS has the authority to assign a mortgage?4 MR. MYERS: Objection. This recent case is

5 not one of the topics authorized by the Court's Order.

6 I would instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.

7 BY MR. KASED:

8 Q. Would you agree that the court r in this case, ruled

9that MERS has no interest in the note or the debt?

10 MS. THOMAS: Objection. The recent

11 settlement opinion is outside of the Court's order. I

12 would object -- I would instruct Mr. Isaacs not to

13 answer.

14 BY MR. KASED:

15 Q. Exhibit 12. Have you ever seen this document before?

16 A. No.

17 Q. This is a Consent Order entered into recently with

18 MERS and various Federal regulators. About seven

19 lines down, on page 2, and I'll read it for the

20 record: "The agencies have identified certain

21 deficiencies and unsafe or unsound practices by MERS

22 and MERSCORP that present financial operational

23 compliance, legal and reputational risk to MERSCORP

24 and MERS and to the participating members. Members

are institutions that use MERSCORP and MERS services5

0n~a:;r~1t!IQ~ISt'_!,\,"'1.\.llif:l1l:n~;n.r,k.r:nm

Page 30


39/47


1 and have agreed to abide by MERSCORP's rules of

2 membership. I,

3 Now, if we go to the next page, under

4 Article 7, certifying officers.

5 Mr. Myers, you want me to read it for the

6 record?

7 MR. MYERS: That's all right.

8 MR. KASED: "In the 60 days of this order,

9 MERS shall prepare and submit a plan to the deputy

10 comptroller to strengthen its governance processes

11 applicable to MERS certifying officers with respect to

12 examined members. The plan shall include, but not be

limited to: (a), policies and processes to designate3

14 or certify individuals as authorized MERS certifying

15 officers, and that only such individuals act in such

16 capacity_

17 (b), policies, processes and resources to

18 track the identity and activities of MERS certifying

19 officers and to ensure their compliance with the rules

20 and related requirements.

21 (cl, policies, processes and resources to

22 register third-party MERS certifying officers who are

23 acting for examined members.

24 (dl, policies, processes and resources to

ensure the adequacy and appropriateness of training5

~l~J:iB,~'I.Q;~,~S\'l.... vw.blnnnnsturk .. rnm

Page 31


40/47

MARSHALL ISAACSMay 13 , 2011

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

for ce r t i fy ing offi cers .

(e) , pol i c i e s , proces s es , and res ources to

ensure that examined members comply wi th the MERS

Members h i p Rule 8 and MERS Announcement 2011-01 . "

And, "( f ) , pol i c i e s , proces s es and

resources to ensure tha t examined members and th i rd

par t i e s can quickly and accura t e ly de te rmine a

speci f i c i ndi vi dual des igna ted to act a s author i zed

MERS cert i fy i ng offi ce rs . "

Mr. I saacs , can you te l l me about how many

of thes e as s i gnment s you executed?

MS. THOMAS: Object ion . The Cour t only

au t ho r i z e s hi s t es t imony as to the as s i gnment mortg age

da ted Janua ry 3 rd , 2010 . Any th ing e ls e i s out s ide the

s cope of the Cour t ' s Orde r . I am going to i ns t ruct

Mr. I s aacs not to answer .

MR. MYERS: I would joi n.

18 BY MR. KASED:

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Q. Mr. I s aacs , do you know who Wi ll i am Rough ten i s ?

A. Hets the gent leman who s i gned the corpora t e

re solut i on, I be l i eve .

Q . Do you know who he i s ?

A. No.

Q. Do you know who Steven Ri s e i s ?

A. No.

~ I ; J : i l t f r , IQS~ I !~l \ \ '" . w.hll: l1l!n: ' i-Eud:.[:fJfn

Page 32


41/47


13

14

15

16

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

A. We do not send them to MERS.

Q. When you prepared and executed this assignment, do you

recall who instructed you to do it?

A. The instructions would have corne from the BAC.

Q. And the assignment was done so that BAC could

foreclose on plaintiff's property in their own name

rather than in MER8' name; correct?

A. I -- yes, that is correct.

Q. Do you know what type of mortgage this was?

A. I don't understand your question.

Q. As far as an adjustable rate, fixed rate,

conventional. And if you don't know, that's fine.

A. No. Not off the top of my head, no.

Q. So the assignment was executed under instruction from

BAC; correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Does the phrase, Clues System, mean anything to you?7

18

19

MS. THOMAS: Objection. Clues System is

outside the scope of the Court's Order. I'm going to


21 BY MR. Y~SED:

22

23

24

25

Q. Do you know what the term soft market means?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. The topic of a

soft market is outside the scope of the Court's Order.

I would instruct Mr. Isaacs not to answer.

0n~a:~a~rQ;~IS'r,"\n\'.hlf;nlm:,tr~r;k.r.rJm

Page 34


42/47


1 BY MR. KASED:

2

3

4

5

Q. Do you know what the term fast and easy loan refers

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

A. I don't know.

to?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. Fast and easy loan

is outside the scope of the Court's Order. I would


7 BY MR. KASED:

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

A.

Q. Mr. Isaacs, going back to the mortgage, which I

believe is Exhibit 4, can you tell me who the lenderwas on this mortgage?

A. Countrywide Bank.

Q. And who was the mortgagee?

A. MERS.

Q. And then Countrywide merged with Bank of America.

That would be around 2008. Is that correct or you

don't know?

Q. And then this mortgage was assigned about three years

after the mortgage was executed; correct?

About two years.

Q. Do you have any idea when the foreclosure was

scheduled for in this case?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. Foreclosure is

not -- is outside the scope of the deposition -- or

outside the Court's Order. I would instruct

~I~li,IQ~IS\\'l.\"'w.l}tnJllln;lnr.k.l:t;fn

Page 35


43/47


1 Mr. Isaacs not to answer.

2 BY MR. KASEO:

3

4

5

6

Q. Do you know about how many documents you've handled as

9

10

11

a MERS officer since you became a MERS officer?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. That's outside the

scope of the Court's Order. I would instruct


17

18

19

8 BY MR. KASED:

12

13

14

15

16

Q. Going back to the assignment, as an officer of MEHS,

and as the attorney who prepared the assignment, are

you both the attorney and the client on this

assignment?

A. I'm not the client, no.

Q. But you're an officer of the client?

A. I have signing authority as an officer for MERS.

Q. Do you know how many certifying officers there are ln

the country for MERS?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. That's outside the

scope of the Court's Order. I am going to instruct


21 BY r"1R_ K.Zl,.SED:

22

23

24

25

Q. Have you ever heard the saying, "the mortgage follows

the note"?

MS. THOMAS: Objection. It's outside the

scope of the Court's Order. I would instruct

On~~~R:{t!rrQ~ISwww.hlcnerntnck.rnm


44/47



2 BY MR. KASED:

3 Q. By reading the mortgage, would you say that since the

4 mortgagee is one entity and the lender is another

5 entity, would you agree that the mortgage and the

6 note, in this case, have been split?

7 MS. THOMAS: Objection. That's outside the

8 scope of the Court's Order. I would instruct


10 BY MR. KASED:

11 Q. Do you know if MERS has any employees?

12 MS. THOMAS: Objection. That's outside the

13 scope of the Court's order. I would instruct


15 MR. MYERS: Counsel, I would request that

16 you stick to the four topics that Judge Chabot

17 provided as the framework for this depos t

18 We've just experienced a lengthy series of questions

19 that are clearly, in my opinion, outside the scope,

20 and if you have no desire to comply with

21 Judge Chabot's Order, let us know at this point,

22 because none of the questions you're asking right now

23 comply with the framework.

24 BY MR. KASED:

Q. Exhibits 13 through IS, Mr. Isaacs. I don't have any5

~I.tn~a~I.9;~I~'.A.!\.~"'\\'.[lir;nt!n,;ltlr:I:"'f:(Jrn

Page 37


45/47


1 questions regarding these exhibits, I just went to

2 know if you've ever seen these documents before.

3 A. I have not seen any of these documents before.4 Q. Okay. Thank you.

5 MR. KASED: Irm just about finished. I

6 just want the record to reflect that Mr. Isaacs is not

7 a party to this lawsuit, and r to the best of my

8 knowledge, not a client of Ms. Thomas r yet he was

9 instructed by Ms. Thomas not to answer a majority of

10 my questions.

11 Thatrs all I have, Mr. Isaacs.

12 MR. MYERS: The only thing I would add on

13 that is that, to the extent I did not concur in every

14 objection, to make the record clear, that I did

15 that I do concur in Ms. Thomas's objection, and that

16 the record does reflect that at no point did I ever

17 inform Mr. Isaacs that he should answer any of those

18 questions.

19 I have no further follow-up questions or

20 anything.

21 MS. THOMAS; I have no questions for

22 Mr. Isaacs.

23 MR. KASED: Thank you, Slr.

24 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

(The deposition was concluded at 2:57 p.m.5

6I~tIRr~I.g;~r!S'i.."t"",,.I)il~nlm.I:,'[Jr.k.r:nm

Page 38


46/47

Page 39

MARSHALL ISAACSMay 13 t 2011

1 Signature of the witness was not requested by counsel

2 for the respective parties hereto.}

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

o ' ) J : iS ;1~I9 ;~IS' i ' : . r ' \ v. . , . .'+hl.:nnn:;lnr;l:. .OJm


47/47

CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY

STATE OF MICHIGAN

SS

COUNTY OF OAKLAND

I, ALISON C. MATTHES, certify that this

deposition was taken before me on the date

hereinbefore set forth; that the foregoing

questions and answers were recorded by me

stenographically and reduced to computer

transcription; that this is a true, full and

correct transcript of my stenographic notes so

taken; and that I am not related to, nor of counsel

to, either party nor interested in the event of

this cause.

ALISON C. MATTHES, CSR-6266

Notary Public,

Oakland County, Michigan

My Commission expires: May 1, 2017

Documents

Issac-Adisho v.Orlans Part 1