c

Timothy L. McCandless, Esq. SBN 147715

c
LAW OFFICES OF TIMOTHY L. MCCANDLESS

c 1881 Business Center Drive, Ste. 9A
San Bernardino, CA 92392
c Tel: 909/890-9192
Fax: 909/382-9956
c
Attorney for Plaintiffs
c
c
c

c
c c
c c c  c
c c

c cc
c

c
___________________________________,
c CASE NO:
And ROES 1 through 5,000, FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
c
FOR QUIET TITLE, DECLARATORY
Plaintiff

c RELIEF, TEMPORARY RESTRAINING
ORDER, PRELIMINARY INJUNTION
c v. AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION,
c
CANCELATION OF INSTRUMENT
SAND CANYON CORPORATION f/k/a AND FOR DAMAGES ARISING
c
OPTION ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION; FROM:
AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SERVICES,
c INC.; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., as Trustee SLANDER OF TITLE; TORTUOUS
for SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007- VIOLATION OF STATUTE [Penal
c
OPT2; DOCX, LLC; and PREMIER TRUST Code § 470(b) ± (d); NOTARY FRAUD;
c DEED SERVICES and all persons unknown
claiming any legal or equitable right, title, estate,
c lien, or interest in the property described in the
complaint adverse to Plaintiff¶s title, or any cloud

c
on Plaintiff¶s title thereto, Does 1 through 10,

c Inclusive,

c Defendants.

c

c
///

c
///

c

c
///

c

c
1
COMPLAINT
 c

///
c

c

c Plaintiffs ___________________________ allege herein as follows:

c
· c· c
c

c
c 1. Plaintiffs ___________ (hereinafter individually and collectively referred to as

c ³___________´), were and at all times herein mentioned are, residents of the County of
c _________, State of California and the lawful owner of a parcel of real property commonly
c
known as: _________________, California _______ and the legal description is:
c
Parcel No. 1:
c

c

c A.P.N. No. _________ (hereinafter ³Subject Property´).

c
2. At all times herein mentioned, SAND CANYON CORPORATION f/k/a OPTION
c
ONE MORTGAGE CORPORATION (hereinafter SAND CANYON´), is and was, a corporation
c
existing by virtue of the laws of the State of California and claims an interest adverse to the right,
c

c title and interests of Plaintiff in the Subject Property.

c 3. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE

c
SERVICES, INC. (hereinafter ³AMERICAN´), is and was, a corporation existing by virtue of

c
the laws of the State of Delaware, and at all times herein mentioned was conducting ongoing


c

c
business in the State of California.

c 4. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., as

c Trustee for SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2 (hereinafter referred to as

c
³WELLS FARGO´), is and was, a member of the National Banking Association and makes an

c
adverse claim to the Plaintiff MADRIDS¶ right, title and interest in the Subject Property.

c

c
2
COMPLAINT
 c

5. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant DOCX, L.L.C. (hereinafter ³DOCX´),

c

c is and was, a limited liability company existing by virtue of the laws of the State of Georgia, and

c a subsidiary of Lender Processing Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation.

c
6. At all times herein mentioned, __________________, was a company existing by
c
virtue of its relationship as a subsidiary of __________________.
c

c
7. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants sued herein

c as DOES I through 10, inclusive, and therefore sues these Defendants by such fictitious names
c and all persons unknown claiming any legal or equitable right, title, estate, lien, or interest in the
c
property described in the complaint adverse to Plaintiffs¶ title, or any cloud on Plaintiffs¶ title
c
thereto. Plaintiffs will amend this complaint as required to allege said Doe Defendants¶ true

c

c names and capacities when such have been fully ascertained. Plaintiffs further allege that

c Plaintiffs designated as ROES 1 through 5,000, are Plaintiffs who share a commonality with the
c
same Defendants, and as the Plaintiffs listed herein.
c
8. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that at all times herein
c
mentioned, Defendants, and each of them, were the agent and employee of each of the remaining
c

c Defendants.

c 9. Plaintiffs allege that each and every defendants, and each of them, allege herein

c
ratified the conduct of each and every other Defendant.


c
10. Plaintiffs allege that at all times said Defendants, and each of them, were acting

c
within the purpose and scope of such agency and employment.

c

c 11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that circa July 2004,

c DOCX was formed with the specific intent of manufacturing fraudulent documents in order

c
create the false impression that various entities obtained valid, recordable interests in real

c

c
3
COMPLAINT
 c

properties, when in fact they actually maintained no lawful interest in said properties.
c

c 12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that as a regular and

c ongoing part of the business of Defendant DOCX was to have persons sitting around a table
c
signing names as quickly as possible, so that each person executing documents would sign
c
approximately 2,500 documents per day. Although the persons signing the documents claimed to
c

c
be a vice president of a particular bank of that document, in fact, the party signing the name was

c not the person named on the document, as such the signature was a forgery, that the name of the
c person claiming to be a vice president of a particular financial institution was not a ³vice
c
president´, did not have any prior training in finance, never worked for the company they
c
allegedly purported to be a vice president of, and were alleged to be a vice president

c

c simultaneously with as many as twenty different banks and/or lending institutions.

c 13. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that the actual signatories
c
of the instruments set forth in Paragraph 12 herein, were intended to and were fraudulently
c
notarized by a variety of notaries in the offices of DOCX in Alpharetta, GA.
c
14. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that for all purposes the
c

c intent of Defendant DOCX was to intentionally create fraudulent documents, with forged

c signatures, so that said documents could be recorded in the Offices of County Recorders through

c
the United States of America, knowing that such documents would forgeries, contained false


c
information, and that the recordation of such documents would affect an interest in real property

c
in violation of law.

c

c 15. Plaintiffs allege that on or about, ____________, that they conveyed a first deed

c of trust (hereinafter ³DEED´) in favor of Option One Mortgage, Inc. with an interest of

c
approximately $_________________.

c

c
4
COMPLAINT
 c

16. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that Option One
c

c Mortgage sold interest in the aforementioned DEED to unknown parties as a derivative security,

c who then repeatedly resold their respective interests, if any, in said DEED on at least six
c
different occasions.
c
17. Plaintiffs allege that pursuant to California Civil Code section 2932.5, an assignee
c

c
may effectuate the power of sale provided the assignment is properly acknowledged and

c recorded. Plaintiffs further allege that due to acts and/or omissions of Defendants, and each of
c them, that none of the named Defendants herein are holders in due course and do not maintain an
c
interest in the Subject Property, including but, not limited to: there are no lawful records
c
connecting Defendants to this property other that Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One

c

c Mortgage Corporation, and the interest of Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage

c Corporation was long ago sold-off to unrelated third parties for which there is no proper ³paper
c
trail´ to establish the true holder in due course. Plaintiffs allege that as will be seen hereinafter
c
that Defendants, and each of them, resorted to forged instruments in an attempt to create the
c
appearance that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Trustee of the Soundview Home Loan
c

c Trust 2007-OPT2.

c 18. Plaintiffs allege that due to certain acts and/or omissions once the DEED was

c
³assigned´ to various parties the DEED was detrimentally affected in a number ways, including


c
but, not limited to: that the power of sale inherent in the DEED was severed, because the

c
subsequent parties were no longer holders in due course as a matter of law.

c

c 19. On April 3, 2011, on the national program ³60 Minutes´, two former employees

c of DOCX made admissions which entirely support the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 12 and

c
13, herein. During said program, former employee, Chris Pendley [sic] stated that he personally

c

c
5
COMPLAINT
 c

drafted the name of ³Linda Green´ on thousands and thousands of assignments, although he was
c

c not Linda Green, that he was signing in excess of 2,500 documents per day, and that he was paid

c the sum of ten ($10.00) per hour to forge the name of ³Linda Green´ and that he made no
c
inspection of any documents to determine whether the execution of the assignment was lawful,
c
had no training to make an inspection of documents to determine if the assignment was lawful,
c

c
and was told by his superiors that his execution of the name Linda Green was lawful.

c 20. On April 3, 2011, Linda Green, a former employee of DOCX, appeared on the
c aforementioned ³60 Minutes´ program and stated that she worked in the mailroom of DOCX and
c
eventually signed some documents, that although she was listed as a vice president of several
c
companies, that she had no connection with those companies, and that she was aware that her

c

c signature was being used by several other persons on assignments because her name was short

c and easy to spell.

c
21. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that Linda Green, acting
c
in her capacity as an employee of DOCX allowed her name to forged upon literally thousands of
c
purported assignments, although Linda Green never executed those assignments, never inspected
c

c those assignments, and that DOCX simply listed that Linda Green was a vice president at various

c Banks and lending institutions, however, Linda Green was not lawfully a vice president, and the

c
assertion that Linda Green was a vice president was an artifice. Plaintiffs further allege that


c
Linda Green¶s name fraudulent appeared on documents for the following institutions: 11-11-

c
2004 & 06-22-2006 Vice President, Loan Documentation, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., successor by

c

c merger to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc.; 08-11-2008 & 08-14-2008 Vice President,

c Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage

c
Acceptance, Inc.; 08-27-2008 Vice President, American Home Mortgage Servicing as successor-

c

c
6
COMPLAINT
 c

in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation; 09-19-2008 Vice President, Mortgage

c

c Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 09-30-2008;

c Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home
c
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 09-30-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
c
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 10-08-2009 Vice President & Asst.
c

c
Secretary, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Ameriquest Mortgage

c Corporation; 10-16-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as

c nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 10-17-2008, 11-20-2008
c
Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American
c
Brokers Conduit; 11-20-2008 Vice President, Option One Mortgage Corporation; 12-08-2008

c

c Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American

c Brokers Conduit; 12-15-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as
c
nominee for HLB Mortgage; 12-24-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
c
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 12-26-2008 Vice
c
President, American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.; 01-13-2009 Vice President, Mortgage
c

c Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for Family Lending Services, Inc.; 01-15-2009

c Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for

c
American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 02-03-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic


c
Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 02-05-2009 Vice

c
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for

c

c American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 02-24-2009 Vice President, American Home

c Mortgage Servicing, Inc. as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation;

c

c

c
7
COMPLAINT
 c

02-25-2009 Vice President, Bank of America, N.A.; 02-27-2009 Vice President, American
c

c Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation;

c 03-02-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as
c
nominee for American Home Mortgage; 03-04-2009 Vice President, Argent Mortgage Company,
c
LLC by Citi Residential Lending Inc., attorney-in-fact; 03-06-2009 & 03-20-2009 Vice
c

c
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home

c Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 04-15-2009, 04-17-2009, 04-20-2009 Vice President, Bank of

c America, N.A.; 05-11-2009, 07-06-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
c
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 07-14-2009 Vice
c
President, Bank of America, N.A.; 07-15-2009 Vice President & Asst. Secretary, American

c

c Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as

c trustee for, Ameriquest Mortgage Securities, Inc. asset-backed pass through certificates, series
c
2004-R7, under the pooling and servicing agreement dated July 1, 2004; 07-30-2009 Vice
c
President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home
c
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 08-12-2009 Vice President, Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option
c

c One Mortgage Corporation; 08-28-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration

c Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 09-03-2009

c
Asst. Vice President, Sand Canyon Corporation formerly known as Option One Mortgage


c
Corporation; 09-03-2009 Asst. Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting

c
solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage; 09-04-2009 Asst. Secretary, Mortgage

c

c Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage;

c 09-08-2009 Vice President, Bank of America, N.A.; 09-21-2009 & 09-22-2009 Vice President,

c
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage

c

c
8
COMPLAINT
 c

Acceptance, Inc. Plaintiffs further allege that Linda Green was never lawfully the vice president
c

c of any entity, more particularly the foregoing listed entities.

c 22. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that Defendant DOCX
c
was a continuing criminal enterprise whose sole function was to create and forge fraudulent
c
assignments which would purport to convey interests in real property and the entities listed in
c

c
Paragraph 21 hereinabove, were complicate in Defendants¶ fraud.

c 23. Plaintiffs are informed and believe from beginning circa 2007 and continuing
c until sometime in 2010, DOCX produced thousands upon thousands of false and fraudulent
c
assignments which were recorded in the Offices of the County Recorders of the State of
c
California, and several other States in the United States of America as well.

c

c 24. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that during the ³60

c Minutes´ program on April 3, 2011, another former DOCX employee, Savonna Krite [sic] acted
c
as a notary public and notarized that the signatures of Linda Green and others, were valid,
c
however, she admitted that the notarizations were not that of Linda Green. Savonna Krite [sic]
c
further admitted that she was told by officers of DOCX that it was ³alright´ for her to notarize
c

c signatures as being valid. Savonna Krite [sic] also admitted as of the program that she now

c understands that her notarizations of said assignments were ³not alright.´

c
25. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that because the entire


c
company structure of DOCX was to manufacture forged assignments by the thousands per day,

c
without any consideration whatsoever that the information contained on those assignments was

c

c valid, and that the notarizations were in fact fraudulent, that no reasonable expectation can be

c made that any of the assignments executed by DOCX employees were or are valid.

c
26. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that circa _______,

c

c
9
COMPLAINT
 c

Defendants, and each of them, utilized the services of DOCX in order to manufacture a
c

c fraudulent assignment from Defendant AMERICAN to WELLS FARGO, because WELLS

c FARGO could not find documents which would demonstrate that it owned an interest in the
c
Plaintiffs¶ subject property.
c
27. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that WELLS FARGO
c

c
never had a lawful interest in the Plaintiffs¶ subject property, either in its own capacity or as that

c as Trustee for the SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2.

c 28. Plaintiffs allege that they fully tendered all mortgage payments which were
c
lawfully due under the DEED, and that they are not in default of their payments, having lawfully
c
tendered all amounts due and owing.

c

c 29. Plaintiffs allege that WELLS FARGO made demands for payment as against the

c DEED, however, Plaintiffs allege that WELLS FARGO was not a lawful holder in due course,
c
that SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2 was not a lawful holder in due course,
c
and that neither party had any lawful right, title and interest in the DEED.
c
30. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about,
c

c _______________, Defendant DOCX at the request of Defendants, and each of them, forged an

c instrument (hereinafter ³FORGED ASSIGNMENT´) with the name ³Linda Green´ which was

c
notarized by


c
³Ellis Simmons.´

c
31. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about,

c

c _______________, an unknown employee of DOCX, in the course and scope of their

c employment, signed the name ³Linda Green´ and that such document had a notary stamp placed

c

c

c
10
COMPLAINT
 c

upon the FORGED ASSIGNMENT which purported to be lawfully notarized by ³Ellis

c

c Simmons.´

c 32. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that the FORGED
c
ASSIGNMENT was then sent by DOCX through the United States Postal Service or transmitted
c
by facsimile over the telephone and telegraph wires of the United States of America to
c

c
Defendants, and each of them, in order that such FORGED ASSIGNMENT would be recorded

c in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of _______________.

c 32. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about
c
_______________, that Defendants, and each of them, their employees and/or agents, caused the
c
FORGED ASSIGNMENT which unlawfully affected Plaintiffs¶ subject property to be recorded

c

c in the Office of the Country Recorder of the County of _______________ as Instrument No.

c _______________. A true and correct copy of the assignment set forth in Paragraphs 30 ± 31, is
c
attached hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference.
c
33. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that the sole claim of
c
Defendants, and each of them, as to their right, title and/or interest in the Plaintiffs¶ Subject
c

c Property is the FORGED ASSIGNMENT.

c 34. Plaintiffs allege that the FORGED ASSIGNMENT as a matter of law is void and

c
that it did not constitute a conveyance of an interest to Defendants, or to anyone at all, and that


c
the FORGED ASSIGNMENT is a legal nullity.

c
35. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, and each of them, are presently relying upon the

c

c FORGED ASSIGNMENT and are knowingly and intentionally prosecuting a non-judicial

c foreclosure based solely upon the recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, necessitating the

c
instant action.

c

c
11
COMPLAINT
 c

c  cc c c

c (Slander of Title As Against All Defendants)c
c

c c 36. Plaintiffs incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General Allegations as

c though such have been fully set forth herein.
c 37. Plaintiffs allege that on or about, _______________, Defendants, and each of
c them, in some measure actively, directly, indirectly, openly and secretly contributed to the
c preparation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT and the recordation of said Instrument in the
c Official Records of the Office of the County Recorder of _______________ County.
c 38. Plaintiffs allege that the recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, by
c Defendants and each of them, rendered Plaintiffs¶ title to the Subject Property as unmarketable.

c 39. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, and each of them, recorded the FORGED
ASSIGNMENT without privilege, knowledge and/or consent of Plaintiffs, the information
c

c contained in said FORGED ASSIGNMENT is false in that no lawful conveyance ever existed

c between the parties thereto, and said FORGED ASSIGNMENT when recorded published the
c
information therein which disparaged Plaintiffs¶ title as would lead a reasonable man to falsely
c
assume that Defendants, and each of them, in some measure actually maintained some right, title
c

c
and interest in Plaintiffs¶ Subject Property, whereas, some of the information contained in the

c FORGED ASSIGNMENT is false. A true and correct copy of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT is

c attached hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference.


c
40. Plaintiffs allege that they actually and proximately suffered damages due to the

c
planning, preparation and recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT in an amount the totality

c
of which has not been fully ascertained, but in no event less than the jurisdictional limitations of

c
this court.

c
41. Plaintiffs allege that the slander of the Subject Properties title was intentional,

c
fraudulent, malicious, oppressive and burdensome and deserving the imposition of punitive

c

c
12
COMPLAINT
 c

c damages in an amount sufficient that such conduct will not be repeated.

c

c  c
c c c

c (Tortuous Violation of Statute Penal Code §§ 470(b), 470(d)
c As Against Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation;
c American Home Mortgage Services, Inc.; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee
c for Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2; DOCX, LLC)
c

c 42. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General

c Allegations and Paragraphs 36 through 41 of the First Cause of Action as though such have been
c fully set forth herein.

c 43. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that circa July 2004,
c Defendants, and each of them, contrived a scheme to replace missing documents which
c purported to assert interests in real properties through-out the United States of America.
c 44. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that by August 2008,
c Defendants, and each of them, had in some measure participated in the request for production of
c forged instruments from DOCX, as well as other document forgery mills, the purpose of which
c was to effect title to real properties through-out the United States of America.
45. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about, August
c

c 8, 2008, the agents and/or employees of Defendants and each of them, knowingly and

c intentionally with the intent to defraud Plaintiffs¶ interest in the Subject Property, prepared the


c
FORGED ASSIGNMENT and caused said FORGED ASSIGNMENT to be recorded in the

c
Official Records of the Office of the Recorder of the County of _______________ as Instrument

c

c
No. _______________. A true and correct copy of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, is attached

c hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference.

c
46. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, and each of them, tortuously forged the

c

c
13
COMPLAINT
 c

c signature of Linda Green, on the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, with the intent to defraud Plaintiffs,

c and such forgery directly affected Plaintiffs¶ interest in the Subject Property in tortuous violation
c of California Penal Code sections 470(b) and 470(d).
c 47. Plaintiffs allege that they actually and proximately suffered damages due to the
c planning, preparation and recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT in an amount the totality
c of which has not been fully ascertained, but in no event less than the jurisdictional limitations of
c this court.
c 48. Plaintiffs allege that the tortuous violation of Penal Code sections 470(b) and
c 470(d), by and through the preparation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, and subsequent
c recordation thereof was in willful disregard for Plaintiffs¶ right, title and interest in the Subject
c Property, intentional, fraudulent, malicious, oppressive and burdensome and deserving the

c imposition of punitive damages in an amount sufficient that such conduct will not be repeated.
c

c 
c
c c c
c (Notary Fraud As Against DOCX, LLC and Defendants 1 through 10, Inclusive)
c

c 49. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General

c Allegations, Paragraphs 35 through 41 and Paragraphs 42 through 48 of the First and Second
c Causes of Action as though such have been fully set forth herein.

c 50. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that circa July 2004,

c Defendants, and each of them, contrived a scheme to replace missing documents which


c purported to assert interests in real properties through-out the United States of America.

c 51. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that by August 2008,

c Defendants, and each of them, had in some measure participated in the request for production of

c forged instruments from DOCX, as well as other document forgery mills, the purpose of which

c was to effect title to real properties through-out the United States of America.

c

c

c
14
COMPLAINT
 c

52. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that on or about,
c

c _____________, the agents and/or employees of Defendants and each of them, knowingly and

c intentionally with the intent to defraud Plaintiffs¶ interest in the Subject Property, prepared the
c
FORGED ASSIGNMENT and caused said FORGED ASSIGNMENT to be recorded in the
c
Official Records of the Office of the Recorder of the County of _______________ as Instrument
c

c
No. _______________. A true and correct copy of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, is attached

c hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference.

c
53. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereupon allege that the FORGED
c
ASSIGNMENT contained knowingly false statements including, but not limited to: that Wells
c
Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee for Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2, that Linda Green

c
was a vice president of American Home Mortgage Services, Inc., and that Ellis Simmons
c
lawfully notarized the FORGED ASSIGNMENT.
c
54. Plaintiffs allege that they actually and proximately suffered damages due to the
c
planning, preparation and recordation of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT in an amount the totality
c
of which has not been fully ascertained, but in no event less than the jurisdictional limitations of
c
this court.
c
55. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants, and each of them, committed notary fraud by
c
and through the preparation and notarization of the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, and subsequent

c
recordation thereof was in willful disregard for Plaintiffs¶ right, title and interest in the Subject

c
Property, intentional, fraudulent, malicious, oppressive and burdensome and deserving the


c
imposition of punitive damages in an amount sufficient that such conduct will not be repeated.

c

c


c
c c c

c
(Cancellation of Instrument As Against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Trustee for

c
Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2 and Defendants 1 through 10, Inclusive)

c

c

c
15
COMPLAINT
 c

c 56. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General

c Allegations, Paragraphs 35 through 41 and Paragraphs 42 through 48 and Paragraphs 49
c through 55 of the First, Second and Third Causes of Action as though such have been fully set
c forth herein.
c 57. Plaintiffs allege that a FORGED ASSIGNMENT was recorded in the Official
c Records of the Office of the County Recorder for the County of _______________ as Instrument
c No. _______________.
c 58. Plaintiffs seek an Order of the above-entitled court cancelling Instrument No.
c _______________, in as much as said document contains false information and affects
c Plaintiffs¶ right, title and interest in the Subject Property.
c

c  
c
c c c
c (Quiet Title As Against All Defendants)
c 59. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 35 of the General
c Allegations, Paragraphs 35 through 41 and Paragraphs 42 through 48 and Paragraphs 49 through
c 55 of the First, Second and Third Causes of Action as though such have been fully set forth
c herein.
c 60. For all the facts alleged herein, Plaintiffs seek an Order quieting title as of
c _______________.

c

c 
c
c c c


c (Declaratory Relief As Against All Defendants)

c 61. An actual controversy has arisen.

c 62. The parties desire a judicial determine that they may ascertain their respective

c right, title and interest in the Subject Property.

c 63. A judicial determination is necessary that the parties may right, title and interest

c in the Subject Property.
64. Plaintiffs allege that as a regular and ongoing part of the business of Defendant

c

c
16
COMPLAINT
 c

DOCX was to have persons sitting around a table signing names as quickly as possible, so that
c

c each person executing documents would sign approximately 2,500 documents per day. Although

c the persons signing the documents claimed to be a vice president of a particular bank of that
c
document, in fact, the party signing the name was not the person named on the document, as
c
such the signature was a forgery, that the name of the person claiming to be a vice president of a
c

c
particular financial institution was not a ³vice president´, did not have any prior training in

c finance, never worked for the company they allegedly purported to be a vice president of, and
c were alleged to be a vice president simultaneously with as many as twenty different banks and/or
c
lending institutions, that the actual signatories of the instruments set forth in Paragraph 12 herein,
c
were intended to and were fraudulently notarized by a variety of notaries in the offices of DOCX

c

c in Alpharetta, Georgia, that for all purposes the intent of Defendant DOCX was to intentionally

c create fraudulent documents, with forged signatures, so that said documents could be recorded in
c
the Offices of County Recorders through the United States of America, knowing that such
c
documents would forgeries, contained false information, and that the recordation of such
c
documents would affect an interest in real property in violation of law, that on or about, May 7,
c

c 2007, that they conveyed a first deed of trust (hereinafter ³DEED´) in favor of Option One

c Mortgage, Inc. with an interest of approximately $815,000, that Option One Mortgage sold

c
interest in the aforementioned DEED to unknown parties as a derivative security, who then


c
repeatedly resold their respective interests, if any, in said DEED on at least six different

c
occasions, that pursuant to California Civil Code section 2932.5, an assignee may effectuate the

c

c power of sale provided the assignment is properly acknowledged and recorded. Plaintiffs further

c allege that due to acts and/or omissions of Defendants, and each of them, that none of the named

c
Defendants herein are holders in due course and do not maintain an interest in the Subject

c

c
17
COMPLAINT
 c

Property, including but, not limited to: there are no lawful records connecting Defendants to this
c

c property other that Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation, and the

c interest of Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option One Mortgage Corporation was long ago sold-
c
off to unrelated third parties for which there is no proper ³paper trail´ to establish the true holder
c
in due course. Plaintiffs allege that as will be seen hereinafter that Defendants, and each of them,
c

c
resorted to forged instruments in an attempt to create the appearance that Defendant Wells Fargo

c Bank, N.A. as Trustee of the Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2, that due to certain acts
c and/or omissions once the DEED was ³assigned´ to various parties the DEED was detrimentally
c
affected in a number ways, including but, not limited to: that the power of sale inherent in the
c
DEED was severed, because the subsequent parties were no longer holders in due course as a

c

c matter of law, that on April 3, 2011, on the national program ³60 Minutes´, two former

c employees of DOCX made admissions which entirely support the allegations set forth in
c
Paragraphs 12 and 13, herein. During said program, former employee, Chris Pendley [sic] stated
c
that he personally drafted the name of ³Linda Green´ on thousands and thousands of
c
assignments, although he was not Linda Green, that he was signing in excess of 2,500 documents
c

c per day, and that he was paid the sum of ten ($10.00) per hour to forge the name of ³Linda

c Green´ and that he made no inspection of any documents to determine whether the execution of

c
the assignment was lawful, had no training to make an inspection of documents to determine if


c
the assignment was lawful, and was told by his superiors that his execution of the name Linda

c
Green was lawful, on April 3, 2011, Linda Green, a former employee of DOCX, appeared on the

c

c aforementioned ³60 Minutes´ program and stated that she worked in the mailroom of DOCX and

c eventually signed some documents, that although she was listed as a vice president of several

c
companies, that she had no connection with those companies, and that she was aware that her

c

c
18
COMPLAINT
 c

signature was being used by several other persons on assignments because her name was short
c

c and easy to spell, that Linda Green, acting in her capacity as an employee of DOCX allowed her

c name to forged upon literally thousands of purported assignments, although Linda Green never
c
executed those assignments, never inspected those assignments, and that DOCX simply listed
c
that Linda Green was a vice president at various Banks and lending institutions, however, Linda
c

c
Green was not lawfully a vice president, and the assertion that Linda Green was a vice president

c was an artifice. Plaintiffs further allege that Linda Green¶s name fraudulent appeared on
c documents for the following institutions: 11-11-2004 & 06-22-2006 Vice President, Loan
c
Documentation, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., successor by merger to Wells Fargo Home Mortgage,
c
Inc.; 08-11-2008 & 08-14-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.,

c

c as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 08-27-2008 Vice President,

c American Home Mortgage Servicing as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage

c
Corporation; 09-19-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as
c
nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 09-30-2008; Vice President, Mortgage Electronic
c
Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 09-30-
c

c 2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American

c Brokers Conduit; 10-08-2009 Vice President & Asst. Secretary, American Home Mortgage

c
Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Ameriquest Mortgage Corporation; 10-16-2008 Vice President,


c
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage

c
Acceptance, Inc.; 10-17-2008, 11-20-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration

c

c Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 11-20-2008 Vice President, Option

c One Mortgage Corporation; 12-08-2008 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration

c
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Brokers Conduit; 12-15-2008 Vice President, Mortgage

c

c
19
COMPLAINT
 c

Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for HLB Mortgage; 12-24-2008 Vice
c

c President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home

c Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 12-26-2008 Vice President, American Home Mortgage Servicing,
c
Inc.; 01-13-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for
c
Family Lending Services, Inc.; 01-15-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
c

c
Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 02-03-

c 2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American
c Brokers Conduit; 02-05-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.,
c
acting solely as nominee for
c
American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 02-24-2009 Vice President, American Home

c

c Mortgage Servicing, Inc. as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation;

c 02-25-2009 Vice President, Bank of America, N.A.; 02-27-2009 Vice President, American
c
Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as successor-in-interest to Option One Mortgage Corporation;
c
03-02-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as
c
nominee for American Home Mortgage; 03-04-2009 Vice President, Argent Mortgage Company,
c

c LLC by Citi Residential Lending Inc., attorney-in-fact; 03-06-2009 & 03-20-2009 Vice

c President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home

c
Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 04-15-2009, 04-17-2009, 04-20-2009 Vice President, Bank of


c
America, N.A.; 05-11-2009, 07-06-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration

c
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 07-14-2009 Vice

c

c President, Bank of America, N.A.; 07-15-2009 Vice President & Asst. Secretary, American

c Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., as servicer for Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as

c
trustee for, Ameriquest Mortgage Securities, Inc. asset-backed pass through certificates, series

c

c
20
COMPLAINT
 c

2004-R7, under the pooling and servicing agreement dated July 1, 2004; 07-30-2009 Vice
c

c President, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home

c Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 08-12-2009 Vice President, Sand Canyon Corporation f/k/a Option
c
One Mortgage Corporation; 08-28-2009 Vice President, Mortgage Electronic Registration
c
Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage Acceptance, Inc.; 09-03-2009
c

c
Asst. Vice President, Sand Canyon Corporation formerly known as Option One Mortgage

c Corporation; 09-03-2009 Asst. Secretary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting
c solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage; 09-04-2009 Asst. Secretary, Mortgage
c
Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., acting solely as nominee for American Home Mortgage;
c
09-08-2009 Vice President, Bank of America, N.A.; 09-21-2009 & 09-22-2009 Vice President,

c

c Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as nominee for American Home Mortgage

c Acceptance, Inc. Plaintiffs further allege that Linda Green was never lawfully the vice president
c
of any entity, more particularly the foregoing listed entities, that Defendant DOCX was a
c
continuing criminal enterprise whose sole function was to create and forge fraudulent
c
assignments which would purport to convey interests in real property and the entities listed in
c

c Paragraph 21 hereinabove, were complicate in Defendants¶ fraud, that beginning circa 2007 and

c continuing until sometime in 2010, DOCX produced thousands upon thousands of false and

c
fraudulent assignments which were recorded in the Offices of the County Recorders of the State


c
of California, and several other States in the United States of America as well, allege that during

c
the ³60 Minutes´ program on April 3, 2011, another former DOCX employee, Savonna Krite

c

c [sic] acted as a notary public and notarized that the signatures of Linda Green and others, were

c valid, however, she admitted that the notarizations were not that of Linda Green. Savonna Krite

c
[sic] further admitted that she was told by officers of DOCX that it was ³alright´ for her to

c

c
21
COMPLAINT
 c

notarize signatures as being valid. Savonna Krite [sic] also admitted as of the program that she
c

c now understands that her notarizations of said assignments were ³not alright,´ that because the

c entire company structure of DOCX was to manufacture forged assignments by the thousands per
c
day, without any consideration whatsoever that the information contained on those assignments
c
was valid, and that the notarizations were in fact fraudulent, that no reasonable expectation can
c

c
be made that any of the assignments executed by DOCX employees were or are valid, that circa

c July 2008, Defendants, and each of them, utilized the services of DOCX in order to manufacture
c a fraudulent assignment from Defendant AMERICAN to WELLS FARGO, because WELLS
c
FARGO could not find documents which would demonstrate that it owned an interest in the
c
Plaintiffs¶ subject property, that WELLS FARGO never had a lawful interest in the Plaintiffs¶

c

c subject property, either in its own capacity or as that as Trustee for the SOUNDVIEW HOME

c LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2, that they fully tendered all mortgage payments which were
c
lawfully due under the DEED, and that they are not in default of their payments, having lawfully
c
tendered all amounts due and owing, that WELLS FARGO made demands for payment as
c
against the DEED, however, Plaintiffs allege that WELLS FARGO was not a lawful holder in
c

c due course, that SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2007-OPT2 was not a lawful holder in

c due course, and that neither party had any lawful right, title and interest in the DEED, that on or

c
about, _______________, Defendant DOCX at the request of Defendants, and each of them,


c
forged an instrument (hereinafter ³FORGED ASSIGNMENT´) with the name ³Linda Green´

c
which was notarized by ³Ellis Simmons,´ that on or about, _______________, an unknown

c

c employee of DOCX, in the course and scope of their employment, signed the name ³Linda

c Green´ and that such document had a notary stamp placed upon the FORGED ASSIGNMENT

c
which purported to be lawfully notarized by ³Ellis Simmons,´ that the FORGED

c

c
22
COMPLAINT
 c

ASSIGNMENT was then sent by DOCX through the United States Postal Service or transmitted
c

c by facsimile over the telephone and telegraph wires of the United States of America to

c Defendants, and each of them, in order that such FORGED ASSIGNMENT would be recorded
c
in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of _______________, that on or about
c
_______________, that Defendants, and each of them, their employees and/or agents, caused the
c

c
FORGED ASSIGNMENT which unlawfully affected Plaintiffs¶ subject property to be recorded

c in the Office of the Country Recorder of the County of _______________ as Instrument No.
c _______________. A true and correct copy of the assignment set forth in Paragraphs 30 ± 31, is
c
attached hereto as Exhibit ³A´, and is incorporated by this reference, that the sole claim of
c
Defendants, and each of them, as to their right, title and/or interest in the Plaintiffs¶ Subject

c

c Property is the FORGED ASSIGNMENT, that the FORGED ASSIGNMENT as a matter of law

c is void and that it did not constitute a conveyance of an interest to Defendants, or to anyone at
c
all, and that the FORGED ASSIGNMENT is a legal nullity, that Defendants, and each of them,
c
are presently relying upon the FORGED ASSIGNMENT and are knowingly and intentionally
c
prosecuting a non-judicial foreclosure based solely upon the recordation of the FORGED
c

c ASSIGNMENT, necessitating the instant action, and as such, the Defendants set forth herein

c have no right, title and interest in the Subject Property, whereas, Defendants contend that all of

c
their acts and/or omissions were lawful and that Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Trustee of the


c
Soundview Home Loan Trust 2007-OPT2.

c

c

c Ä
 cPlaintiffs Manuel A Madrid and Virginia J. Madrid pray for Judgment as

c follows:

c
c
c  c c
c
 c c c

c

c
23
COMPLAINT
 c

1. For an Order, restraining Defendants, and their agents, employees, officers, attorneys,
c

c and representatives from engaging in or performing any of the following acts: (i) proceeding

c with the non-judicial foreclosure without an Order of this court, (ii) offering, or advertising this
c
property for sale and (ii) attempting to transfer title to this property and or (iii) holding any
c
auction therefore;
c

c
2. For general damages subject to proof at time of trial;

c 3. For special damages subject to proof at time of trial;

c 4. For punitive damages subject to proof at time of trial;
c
5. For costs of suit herein;
c
6. For reasonable attorney¶s fees provided by contract or statute; and

c

c 7. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.

c c
c  c
c c c
c
1. For general damages according to proof at time of trial;
c
2. For special damages according to proof at time of trial;
c
3. For costs of suit incurred herein;
c

c 4. For reasonable attorney¶s fees provided by contract or statute; and

c 5. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.

c
c
c 

c
c c c


c
1. For an Order cancelling Instrument No. _______________, which was recorded on

c
August in the

c

c Office of the Country Recorder of the County of _______________;

c 2. For costs of suit incurred herein;

c
3. For reasonable attorney¶s fees as provided by contract or statute; and

c

c
24
COMPLAINT
 c

4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
c

c c
c  
c
c c c

c 1. For an Order quieting title to the Subject Property from _______________;

c
2. For costs of suit incurred herein;
c
3. For reasonable attorney¶s fees subject to proof at time of trial; and
c

c
4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.

c c
c 
c
c c c
c 1. For a declaration that Defendants do not have a right, title and interest in the Subject
c
Property;
c
2. For costs of suit incurred herein;

c

c 3. For reasonable attorney¶s fees subject to proof at time of trial; and

c 4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
c
Dated: _______, 2011 Äc  c c
c c c c c c c c 
cc  c
c
c c
c
c
c c c c c c c c
c c c c c c c c ccccccTimothy L. McCandless, Esq.,
Attorney for Plaintiffs

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c
25
COMPLAINT
 c

å  c
c

c I, Timothy L. McCandless am the attorney of record for Plaintiffs in the above-entitled

c action. The Plaintiffs are either absent from the County of Los Angeles where my office is
c
located, or is otherwise unable to verify this complaint, or the facts are within the knowledge of
c
the undersigned. For this reason, I am making this verification.
c

c
I have read the foregoing Complaint and know of its contents. I am informed and believe

c the matters therein to be true, and on that ground, allege that the matters stated in it are true. I
c declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration
c
was executed at San Bernardino, California
c
DATED: __________, 2011

c

c ____________________________
Timothy L. McCandless, Esq.
c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c

c
26
COMPLAINT