Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 20

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

District of Columbia Circuit


Appeal No. 14-5265
CONSUMER FINANCIAL
PROTECTION BUREAL, et al.,
Plaintiff/Appellee/

)
)
) On Appeal from
) Judge Rosemary M. Collyer
) Final Order 10/15/2014
v.
) Civil Action No. 13-2025(RMC)
)
OCWEN FINANCIAL
)
CORPORATION, et al.,
)
Defendants/Appellee/Respondents
)
)
CHRISTOPHER STOLLER
)
Intervenor/Appellant/Petitioner )
NOTICE OF FILING
TO:

SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on the 14th day of December 2014, there was filed via First
Class Mail with the Clerk of the Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit the attached 1)
Petitioners Petition for Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt.

_______________________________
/s/ Christopher Stoller, Appellant/Petitioner

6045 W. Grand Avenue


Chicago, Illinois 60639
312--834-9717
email Ldms4@hotmail.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Original electronically transmitted to the Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the DC
Appeals Court using the CM/ECF System for filing this 14tht day of December, 2014.

/s/Christopher Stoller
/
Clerk of the Court
E. Barrett Prettyman

SERVICE LIST

U.S. Courthouse and


William B. Bryant Annex
333 Constitution Ave., NWWashington, DC 20001

William C. Erbey, Executive Chairman,


Ocwen Board of Directors
Ronald M. Faris, Ocwen Board of Directors
Ronald J. Korn, Ocwen Board of Directors
William H. Lacy, Ocwen Board of Directors
Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Ocwen Board of Directors
Robert A. Salcetti, Ocwen Board of Directors
Barry N. Wish, Ocwen Board of Directors
Mitra Hormozi, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP
James Sottile, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP
Timothy Hayes, General Counsel
Ocwen Financial Corporation
1661 Worthington Road, Suite 100
West Palm Beach, FL 33409
Ocwen Financial Corporation, related companies
William Shepro, Legal Counsel and President of
of Altisource1 Portfolio Solutions S.A. And for
888-255-1791
Western Progressive2 Arizona,
Premium Title Services Inc.,

2002 Summit Blvd, suite 600


Altanta, Ga 30319
www.altisource.com/

Keven J. Wilcox, General Counsel


Ocwen Financial Corporation related company,
Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A.
Western Progressive Arizona,
Premium Title Services Inc.,
2002 Summit Blvd, suite 600
Atlanta, Ga 30319

866-960-8299

1 http://www.marketwatch.com/story/altisource-investigation-initiated-by-former-louisiana-attorneygeneral-kahn-swick-foti-llc-investigates-altisource-portfolio-solutions-sa-following-disclosure-ofdepartment-of-financial-services-2014-08-10
2 Western Progressive, Premium Title Services Inc.,Altisource's wholly owned trustee
subsidiaries, processes residential non-judicial foreclosures in California, Nevada
and Arizona. Western Progressive-Arizona, Inc. 1150 E. University Drive Tempe, AZ
85281. Phone: 866-960-8299 stephanie.spurlock@altisource.com

Robert R. Maddox
J. Riley Key
BRADLEY ARANT BOULT
CUMMINGS LLP
One Federal Place
1819 Fifth Avenue North
Birmingham, AL 35203
(205) 521-8454
Fax: (205) 488-6454
Email: rmaddox@babc.com
Defendant/Respondent
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC represented by Robert R. Maddox
(See above for address)
Patin, Douglas L. (Doug)
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
1615 L Street, N.W.
Suite 1350
Washington, DC 20036
P: 202.393.7150 dpatin@babc.com
Lumsden, Dana C.
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
Bank of America Corporate Center
100 N. Tryon Street
Suite 2690
Charlotte, NC 28202
P: 704.338.6000 dlumsden@babc.com
Phil Bulter
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
RSA Dexter Avenue Building
445 Dexter Avenue
Suite 9075
Montgomery, AL 36104
P: 334.956.7700 pbutler@babc.com
Patterson, Robert S. (Bob)
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
Roundabout Plaza
1600 Division Street
Suite 700
Nashville, TN 37203 bpatterson@babc.com
P: 615.244.2582

Kimberly B. Martin
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
200 Clinton Avenue West
Suite 900
Huntsville, AL 35801-4900
P: 256.517.5100

kmartin@babc.com

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP


One Jackson Place
188 E. Capitol Street
Suite 400
Jackson, MS 39201
P: 601.948.8000
Managing Partner
Cupples, Margaret Oertling
Partner
mcupples@babc.com

General Counsel
Alabama State Bar
Center for Professional Responsibility
415 Dexter Avenue
Montgomery, AL 36104
(800) 354-6154
(334) 269-1515
Fax: (334) 261-6311
Website: www.alabar.org
Chief Bar Counsel
State Bar of Arizona
4201 North 24th Street, Suite 100
Phoenix, AZ 85016-6266
(866) 482-9227
(602) 252-4804
Fax: (602) 271-4930
Website: www.azbar.org
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
District of Columbia Office of Bar Counsel
515 5th Street, NW
Building A, Room 117
Washington, DC 20001
(202) 638-1501
Fax: (202) 638-0862
Website: www.dcbar.org

FLORIDA
Director of Lawyer Regulation
The Florida Bar
651 East Jefferson Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2300
(800) 342-8060
(850) 561-5776
Fax: (850) 561-9403
Website: www.flabar.org
GEORGIA
General Counsel
State Bar of Georgia
104 Marietta Street NW, Suite 100
Atlanta, GA 30303
(800) 334-6865 ext. 720
(404) 527-8720
Fax: (404) 527-8744
Website: www.gabar.org
MISSISSIPPI
General Counsel
Mississippi State Bar
643 North State Street
Jackson, MS 39202
(601) 948-0568
Fax: (601) 355-8635
Website: www.msbar.org
NORTH CAROLINA
Counsel
North Carolina State Bar
Post Office Box 25908
Raleigh, NC 27611-5908
(919) 828-4620
Fax: (919)834-8156
Website: www.ncbar.gov
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
AskDOJ@usdoj.gov

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


District of Columbia Circuit
Appeal No. 14-5265
CONSUMER FINANCIAL
PROTECTION BUREAL, et al.,
Plaintiff/Appellee,
v.
OCWEN FINANCIAL
CORPORATION, et al.,
Defendants/Appellee
Respondents
CHRISTOPHER STOLLER
Intervenor/Appellant
Petitioner

)
)
) On Appeal from
) Judge Rosemary M. Collyer
) Final Order 10/15/2014
) Civil Action No. 13-2025(RMC)
)
)
)
)
)
)

PETITIONERS PETITION FOR ADJUDICATION OF INDIRECT CRIMINAL CONTEMPT


NOW COMES the Petitioner, Christopher Stoller, 65, sui juris, (Stoller), files Petitioners
Petition for Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt pursuant to Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules
of Criminal Procedure, against Appellee William C. Erbey, Executive Chairman of Ocwen Financial
Corporation, Ocwen Board of Directors3, Ronald M. Faris, Wiliam H. Lacy, Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Robert A.
Salcetti, Barry N. Wish, Mitra Hormozi, James Sottile, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, Timothy Hayes, General
Counsel Ocwen Financial Corporation, (Ocwen) , related companies, Altisource Portfolio Solutions
S.A., William Shepro, Legal Counsel and President of

Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A.

3. The Appellant/Petitioner said property is located in Arizona as well known to the Respondents. The
Arizona Supreme court has stated that equity denies title property obtained through actual fraud,
misrepresentations, concealments, or through undue influence, duress, taking advantage of ones
weakness or necessities, or through any other similar means or under any similar circumstances).
This case stands for an unexceptional rule: Principals may not benefit from the inequitable conduct
of their agents. (IVO Queiroz v. Daniel Harvey, Case No. CV-08-0308-PR. We conclude that the
agents inequitable acts may be imputed to the principal whether or not the principal knew of
the agents misconduct. Petitioner requests that this court take judicial notice of the IVO
Queiroz v. Daniel Harvey, Case No. CV-08-0308-PR Exhibit A

,Western Progressive Arizona,

Premium Title Services Inc.,

Keven J. Wilcox, General

Counsel, Altisource Portfolio Solutions S.A. , Keven J. Wilcox, General Counsel Altisource
Portfolio Solutions S.A. BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMINGS LLP , Robert R.

Maddox, J. Riley Key, Douglass Patin, Dana C. Lumsden, Phil Butler, Robert Patterson
Firm LLC herein after referred to as Respondents and in support of his petition Petition for
Adjudication of Indirect Criminal Contempt for violations of the consent judgment (Doc 12). All of the
respondents had prior actual and constructive notice of the consent judgment (Doc.12) and violated the
said consent judgment (Doc 12) outside of the purview of the Court4. states as follows:

FACTUAL BACKGROUND
1.

Respondent all have actual and constructive notice of the Consent Judgment (Doc 12).
The Respondent either directly or through their agents have knowledge that Christopher Stoller
purchased a piece of property in Scottsdale Arizona known as 28437 N. 112th Way Scottsdale,
Az 85262-4725 Philip Stone, the prior owner, quit claimed his interest to Christopher Stoller
Pension and Profit Sharing Plan Limited (CSPPSP) on September 19, 2008 (Exhibit 15),
recorded in the Maricopa County Recorders Office 2008-0815422 on 09/22/08. The successor
trustee was divested of its power of sale after 09/22/08.

2.

Respondents have knowledge that on September 19, 2008, Philip Stone transferred and
conveys to CSPPSP a Bahamas Corporation, and/or Christopher Stoller and/or Leo Stoller
(collectively, Assignees), under the Law of Assignments of Causes of Action(Exhibit 2),

Appellant asks the court to take judicial of its attached Exhibit(s) which are all public documents. A
court may take judicial notice of facts that are not subject to reasonable
dispute in that [they are] either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of
the trial court or (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources
whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); see also
Weinstein v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 175 F. Supp. 2d 13, 16 (D.D.C. 2001) (quoting
Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence). Furthermore, the Federal Rules of Evidence
require a court to take judicial notice of a matter if requested by a party and supplied
with the necessary information. Fed. R. Evid. 201(d); see also In re Ravisent Technologies, Inc. Sec.
Litig., No. 00-CV-1014, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13255, at * 2 (E.D. Pa. July 12, 2004)
5

insofar as permitted by law, forever, any and all causes of action, remedies, or claims, now or in
the future, that Assignor CSPPSP have against any party, not limited to financial institution,
contractors, builders, and their employees, affiliates, successors and assigns, et al., as well as the
right to prosecute such causes of action in the name of Assignor or Assignees or any of them ,
and the right to settle or otherwise resolve such causes of action as Assignees sees fit, regarding
the following real property in Maricopa County, State of Arizona:
3. Lot 3, Pinnacle Foothills, according to Book 398 of Maps, Page 50, and Affidavit of Correction
recorded in Document No. 96-0145582, records of Maricopa County, Arizona. Assessor's Parcel
Number: 216-74-044 , Commonly known as: 28437 N. 112th Way, Scottsdale, Az 85262.
4. Notice(s) of Liz Pendens was filed by the complainant, Christopher Stoller on the subject real
estate on 12/29/2008 2008-1090943 with the Maricopa Counter Recorders Office and again
another Lis Pendens was filed on 12/02/2013 2013-1025435.

5. As well known to the respondents, Philip B. Stone, as of 7/23/2014 did not owe a delinquency
payment of of $197,142.49. Nor does Philip B. Stone, as of July 25, 2014 owe unpaid
principle balance of $646,683.87,plus interest from 02/01/2008. As well known to the
Respondents, all of these debts were discharged in Philip B. Stone's Bankruptcy see Exhibit 3,
yet the Respondents are still attempting to collect on these said debts in violation of the
Bankruptcy Statutes, in clear violation of the Federal Fair Debt Collection Act, the Consent
Judgment(12).
6.

Philip B. Stone's promissory note secured by a Deed of trust and the adjustable rate
note together with the deed of trust securing same was canceled as a result of the United States
Bankruptcy Case 10-11558-17, District of New Mexico and the debt discharge, July 19, 2010.
(Exhibit 3).

7.

Complainant filed a full Release and Full Re-conveyance of said Deed of Trust and all
other debts in connection with same, including the Adjustable Rate Note secured by the Deed of
Trust was filed with the Maricopa County Recorder Office 2014-0512240 08/04/14. (Exhibit
4)

8.

Notwithstanding the fact that Philip B. Stone was not the owner of record on July 23,
2014 and did not owe any monies including the said delinquency payment of of $197,142.49.
Nor does Philip B. Stone, as of July 25, 2014 owe unpaid principle balance of
$646,683.87,plus interest from 02/01/2008. Stone's debts were all discharged in
bankruptcy Exhibit 3.

9.

The respondents caused to be file an unlawful Notice of Trustee's Sale under oath (false
swearing) and caused the fraudulent document Group Exhibit 5 to be recorded in the Maricopa
County Recorder's Office Document number Number 20140480249.

10.

Complainant served a Objection to the Respondents via email and certified mail on 723-14 the fraudulent Notice of trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) filed by the respondents, with
the Maricopa County Recorder's Office on 7/23/2014 Document no. 20140480249 announcing
that the Complainant's property known as 28437 N. 112th Way, Scottsdale, Az 85262-4725 will
be sold at public auction to the highest bidder. At the main entrance of the Superior Court
Building 201 W. Jefferson, Phoenix Az 85003, on 11/12/2014 at 12:30PM of said day. at 1,
Document 20140480249.

11.

The said Notice of Trustee's Sale (Group Exhibit 5) filed by the Respondent's
represents a clear fraud on the Maricopa County Recorders Office, a clear fraud on the Florida
Bar Associations Rules of Professional Conduct 8.4 and a clear fraud on the Complainant for
the following reasons:

12.

The Trustee in the Notice of Trustee Sale document (Group Exhibit 5) has no power
and/or authority to convey the deed of trust dated 05/02/2006 because Philip Stone quit
claimed his interest to Christopher Stoller Pension and Profit Sharing Plan Limited (CSPPSP)
on September 19, 2008, recorded in the Maricopa County Recorders Office 2008-0815422 on
09/22/08 (Exhibit 1) as well known to the Respondents.

13.

The successor trustee was divested of its power of sale after 09/22/08. On September

19, 2008, Philip Stone transfers and conveys to CSPPSP a Bahamas Corporation, and/or
Christopher Stoller and/or Leo Stoller (collectively, Assignees), under the Law of Assignments
of Causes of Action (Exhibit 2), insofar as permitted by law, forever, any and all causes of
action, remedies, or claims, now or in the future, that Assignor CSPPSP have against any party,
not limited to financial institution, contractors, builders, and their employees, affiliates,
successors and assigns, et al., as well as the right to prosecute such causes of action in the name
of Assignor or Assignees or any of them , and the right to settle or otherwise resolve such
causes of action as Assignees sees fit, regarding the following real property in Maricopa
County, State of Arizona:
14.

Lot 3, Pinnacle Foothills, according to Book 398 of Maps, Page 50, and Affidavit of
Correction recorded in Document No. 96-0145582, records of Maricopa County, Arizona.
Assessor's Parcel Number: 216-74-044Commonly known as: 28437 N. 112th Way, Scottsdale,
Az 85262.

15.

The former Trustee, Reconstruct Co NA, was not registered as a loan servicer, broker
with the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions as of September 9, 2011 and pursuant to
their Notice of Trustee Sale Arizona recorded in the Maricopa Recorders Office 20110752511
on 09/09/2011 (Exhibit 6) and lacked the authority to transact business within the State of
Arizona. The Trustee Sale Arizona was void ab initio and canceled by the Trustee. The former
Trustee had thus no authority to assign any interest to the said Respondents in order to conduct
the current trustee sale (Group Exhibit 5) as well known to the respondents

16.

The Respondents shell entities,ALTISOURCE PROFOLIO SOLUTIONS S.A


/Western Progressive Arizona Inc., Western Progressive LLC.,, herein after referred to
as(WPAI) (Substitution Trustee) are not registered either with the Arizona Department of
Financial Institutions and are not licensed as a broker or servicer of mortgages as of the date
July 23, 2014 that the respondents filed with the Maricopa Recorders Office its Substitution of

Trustee ( 20140433956). Group Exhibit 5 as well known to the respondents.


17.

Christiana Trust, a division of Wilmington Savings Fund Society, Trustee of ARLP


Trust 3, not registered with the Arizona Department of financial institutions and is not
licensed as a broker or servicer of mortgages as of the date July 02, 2014. Nor are they
registered with the Arizona Corporation Division and they do not have a corporation certificate
of authority to transact business within the State of Arizona as well known to the respondents.

18.

On July 23, 2014 the Respondents filed their fraudulent Notice of Trustee Sale and
Debt Validation Notice, Statement of breach and non performance, and these documents
(Group Exhibit 5) were fraudulently recorded with the Maricopa Recorders Offices on July
23, 2014 20140480249 out side of the purview of this court for which the respondents are
charged with the offense of Indirect Criminal Contempt.

19.

As well known to the Respondents their successor Trustee WPAI does not qualify as a
Trustee of the deed of Trust in the Trustees capacity as an escrow agent as required by A.R.S.
33-803 (A)(6) according to the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions. WAPI is not a
registered Trustee, they have no license no authority to do business as well known to the
respondents..

20.

As well known to the Respondents the statement of breach or non performance ( Group
Exhibit 5)falsely claiming that Philip Stone is in foreclosure because he is delinquent in
payments is a false and misleading statement, because Philip Stone debts have been
discharged in Bankruptcy Case No. 10-11558-17 District of New Mexico. The Debt
discharge date was July 19, 2010. (Exhibit 3) as well known to the respondents.

21.

As well known to the Respondents the beneficiary or substitute Trustee lacks the
authority under the Release and Full conveyance of the Trustee Deed (Exhibit 4) and the
cancellation of all of debts, including the adjustable rate note, secured by the Deed of Trust and
the Title of the Subject Property being in the name of CSPPHP and cannot not be sold under

the conveyance of the Deed of Trust as well known to the respondents. Notwithstanding, the
respondent have acknowledged that the foreclosure sale will be set again.( At page 8
Defendant-Appellee Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Affirmance Doc
1526546 filed 12/10/2014)
22.

As well known to the Respondents pursuant to the Substitution of Trustee (Group


Exhibit 5) dated June 9th, 2014 Recorders Number 20140433956, Mel-Ling Mitchell, Contact
Management Coordinator, is not an Officer of Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC and is a
unauthorized robo signer. This is further evidence of the respondents clear fraud on the
Maricopa County Recorders Office, consumacious conduct and indirect criminal contempt..

23.

As well known to the respondents the previous trustee (Exhibit 6) BAC Home Loans
Servicing, LP., (BAC) the successor to Countrywide Bank Na, was not registered with the
Arizona Corporation Division, was not registered as a Limited Liability Partnership as of April
9, 2009. BAC was not registered with the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions. BAC
had no authority to convey any assignment to RECONSTRUCT COMPANY, N.A. or Ocwen
Loan Servicing LLC afterwords that would give Ocwen Loan Servicing any authority to
conduct the current mortgage foreclosure of the Petitioner's said property as well known
to the respondents. Notwithstanding the consent judgment (Doc 12) the respondents have
acknowledge that they intend to conduct an unlawful foreclosure of the Petitioner's said
property. (Doc 1526546 at page 8)

24.

The said respondents on June 3rd, 2014, the Maricopa Country Recorders Office
recorded a fraudulent assignment The record beneficial interest under said Deed of Trust as a
result of the last (fraudulent) recorded assignment thereof is Christiana Trust, A Division of
Wilmington Savings Fund Society FSB, not in its individual capacity but as Trustee of ARLP
Trust 3, by an unlawful instrument Recorded on June 3, 2014, in Maricopa County Records at
Recorder's No. 14-360515 c/o Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC 5720 Premier Park Dr West Palm

Beach Fl 33407.
25.

A well known to the Respondents a representative of Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, who
claimed to be an agent, Chi rag Patel, on March 26, 20146, informed Christopher Stoller, that
he was required to have insurance for his property pursuant to a residential mortgage and since
Christopher Stoller has refused to provide a copy of the insurance, Ocwen was placing
insurance on the subject property and would be charging $3,000 annually, for a home owners
insurance policy that would generally cost about $300.00 per year in violation of the consent
judgment (Doc 12).

26.

Chi rag Patel confirmed in a telephonic conversation Thursday, August 21, 2014. Chiral
Patel confirmed that the Notice of Trustee dated July 23, 2014 and recorded at the Maricopa County
Recorder's Office document Number 20140480249 was a fraud and violated the Fare Debt
Collection Act by attempting to collect a debt of Philip B. Stone that was discharged in a New
Mexico Bankruptcy proceeding. Chi rag Patel stated that Ocwen is aware of the Deed of ReConveyance that they received by certified mail, that Ocwen has no lawful interest in the property
known as 28437 N. 112th Way Scottsdale, Arizona 85262 and Ocwen Loan and/or its agent Western
Progressive-Arizona, Inc., will immediately forward Notice to: 28437 N. 112th Way Scottsdale,
Arizona 85262 that the Notice of Trustee's Sale for November 12, 2014 (Exhibit Group Exhibit
5) is permanently canceled. See a true and correct copy of the email marked as Exhibit 7 (email
confirmation)

27.

Notwithstanding,the Respondents knowingly and willfully are continuing to unlawfully


foreclose (Group Exhibit 5) on the Petitioner's property .( At page 8 Defendant-Appellee
Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Affirmance Doc 1526546 filed

Ocwen Loan Servicing had no authority to place an home owners insurance policy on the
subject on March 26, 2004. Christopher Stoller that this was done primarily for the
Respondents to receive a unlawful kickbacks in the form of commissions from the
insurance company from whom policies were obtained and placed, which caused the rates
and the amount of coverage to be excessive in violation of the law and the Consent
Judgment (Doc 12).

12/10/2014)
28.

Respondents are well aware that they are not not entitled to enforce the said note or
mortgage against Philip Stone, which has been discharged (Exhibit 3) A Released with a full
Re-conveyance of the Deed Trust and Cancellation of the Promissory Note and the Adjustable
Rate Note securing the Deed of Trust has been filed and recorded with the Maricopa County
Recorder Office 2014-0512240 08/04/14. (Exhibit 4) as well known to the Respondents.

29.

The Respondents are in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the
Bankruptcy law, the consent judgment (Doc 12) by attempting to collect on a debt from Philip
B. Stone that is not owed that in an of itself is a violation of indirect criminal contempt. The
debt has been discharged Exhibit 3.

30.

In Respondents fraudulent Substitution of Trustee Document (Group Exhibit 5)


Recording Requested by the sham title company, Premium Title Agency, Inc., filed in the
Maricopa County Recorder's office on July 2, 2014 20140433956, states that The successor
trustee (Western Progressive -Arizona, Inc.) appointed herein qualifies as trustee of the trust
Deed in the trustee's capacity as an Insurance Company as required by ARS Section 33-803,
Subsection (A)(6). The above is a fraudulent statement as well known to the Respondents.
Western Progressive -Arizona, Inc., was not registered with the Arizona Department of
Insurance to do business in Arizona as an Insurance Company according to Ruth Oneida, an
employee with the Arizona Department of Insurance.

31.

The Respondents have been notified by the Petitioner's complaint via email and
certified mail correspondence of its objection to the fraudulent Trustee Sale which is marked as
Group Exhibit 8. The Respondents stated in pleadings filed before this court that .( At page 8
Defendant-Appellee Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Affirmance Doc
1526546 filed 12/10/2014)have refused and failed to take any remedial action to with draw the
fraudulent Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and the respondents stated they

intend to foreclose despite their lack of authority and despite their ongoing violations of
the Consent judgment (Doc 12).
32. On October 16, 2014 the Ombudsman from Ocwen Respondent, Nilekha Ghate, Consumer
Account Analyst, Office of the Consumer Ombudsman, Ocwen loan Servicing, LLC sent an
email ( Exhibit 9) correspondence to the Petitioner Christopher Stoller stating that Ocwen
Loan Servicing's office of the CEO and President acknowledges receipt of your e-mail
correspondence dated October 1, 2014. As the Consumer/Customer Advocate, the Office of the
Ombudsman welcomes the opportunity to respond to your inquiry. Attached are copies of the
signed original Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 10) and Deed of Trust (Exhibit 11) signed by
Mr. Philip B. Stone indicating that the loan originated on May 2, 2006 with Countrywide Bank,
N.A. Ocwen commenced servicing this loan from Bank of America (BOA) on September 8,
2012 with the last payment satisfied on the loan being February 1, 2008 payment. take Judicial
Notice of the Email marked as Exhibit 9.
33. The Original note that Respondent Ocwen refers to (Exhibit 10) is a forgery. When it is
compared to the actual true and correct copy of the original Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 12) a
copy of which was actually filed in the New Mexico Bankruptcy of Phil Stone .On page one
(Exhibit 12) of the actual true and correct copy of the Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 12), a copy
of which the court can take judicial notice is from the New Mexico Bankruptcy filing of Philip
Stone. The Philip Stone bankruptcy filing Case 10-11558 Doc 18 filed on 06/11/10. A close
examination of the actual note (Exhibit 12)caries a stamp at the upper right hand of the said
Adjustable Rate Note, I do hereby certify this to be a true and correct copy of the original.
SECURITY TITLE. carrying a signature. The Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 10) that the
Respondents claim was a true and correct copy that Respondent emailed ( to the Petitioner
marked as Exhibit 10 is in fact a forgery. The Respondents manufactured note (Exhibit 10)
does not carry a certification of the top right page 1 of 6 (New Mexico Bankruptcy Case No.

10-11558 entered 6/11//10 at page 4 of 28) (Exhibit 12). Secondly, the forgery (Exhibit 10)
contains a stamp on page 5 of 5 which has a fraudulent stamp PAY TO THE ORDER OF
WITHOUT RECOURSE COUNTRYWIDE BANK, NA BY Laurie Meder, Senior Vice
President. This endorsement is missing completely from the original note Exhibit 12. Secondly
the signature of Laurie Meder is not an original signature it is a forgery. A rubber
stamped signature. Which of course does not appear on the original note (Exhibit 12). It
is clear that the respondents are engaging in indirect criminal contempt, in violations of
the consent judgment (Doc 12) outside of the purview of the court and are continuing to
forge documents in order to effect fraudulent mortgage of the Petitioner's said property
foreclosures, which the Ocwen Respondents have no lawful right to foreclosure.
34. Respondent Robert R. Maddox for the Ocwen Respondents stated in Defendant-Appellee
Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Affirmance (Document 1526546
USCA Case 14-5265 filed on 12/10/2014 at page 8) ...the foreclosure sale will be set
again. Despite the conditions that the respondents agreed to in the Consent Judgment
(Doc 12), the respondents are engaging indirect criminal contmacious conduct and on
going mortgage foreclosure fraud in violation of the consent judgment (Doc 12).
35.

The Respondents are clearly in violation of Rule 42(b) of the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure Indirect Criminal Contempt in conducting the unlawful residential nonjudicial foreclosure marked as Exhibit Group Exhibit 5 in Arizona which is clearly
evidenced in this complaint.
DISCUSSION
Contempt of court is any act which is calculated to embarrass, hinder or obstruct a court in its

administration of justice, or to derogate from the courts authority or dignity. People v. Campbell 123
Ill.App.3d 103 (1984). Criminal contempt is concerned with preserving the dignity of the court while

civil sanctions aim to enforce rights of private parties. In re Marriage of Wilde, 141 Ill. App. 3d, 464,
(1986).
Indirect criminal contempt is distinguished by the fact that it occurs outside of the presence of
the judge or as to matters of which he does not have personal or constructive notice. In re Marriage of
Betts 161 Ill.Dec. 892. The discussion most frequently arises where defendants are trying to classify
contempt as indirect rather than direct, because of the greater procedural protections afforded a
defendant who is accused of indirect criminal contempt including the requirement of proof beyond a
reasonable doubt. See e.g. Id.
Indirect criminal contempt encompasses a broad range of conduct, including: spitting on a
petitioner as the respondent exits the courtroom (where the judge did not witness the act), In re
Marriage of Madary, 519, NE 2d, 509 (1988), failure to return to court after a recess (where the court
did not have knowledge of the reasons for the defendants absence), In re Marriage of Slingerland, 347,
Ill. App. 3d, 707, the filing of the a civil law suit against a trial judge, People v. Kaeding, 192, Ill. App.
3d, 660 (1989), the presentation of a falsified transcript (where the judge did not have judicial notice
the defendants mental state).

People v. Gerard, 146 N.E.2d 229 (1957), and other willful

misrepresentations People v. Penson, 557 N.E.2d 230. The filing of contemptuous documents can be
indirect criminal contempt. People v. Kaeding, 239 Ill. App. 3d, 851 (1993). Whether the contempt is
direct or indirect hinges on whether the judge has personal or constructive knowledge of all of the
elements necessary to prove the offense. Id.
When indirect criminal contempt is premised on the violation of a court order (Doc 12), Totten
explains the necessary elements. See People v. Totten, 118 Ill. 2d, 124, (1987). To sustain a finding of
indirect criminal contempt for the violation of a court order, outside the presence of the court, it must
be proved that there is a court order (Doc 12) and a willful violation of that order (Emphasis added).
Id. [People v. Wilcox, 5 Ill. 2d, 222, (1955)]. The case on which Totten relies elucidates the scope of
Totten. As the court explained in Wilcox, it is necessary to distinguish between two types of contempt,

contempt that consists of unseemly conduct and contempt that is contemptuous disobedience of an
order of the court. The existence of an order of the court (Doc 12) and proof of willful disobedience
are essential to a contempt of the latter type. Id. Totten places no restriction on the type of indirect
criminal contempt at issue in this case, which does not involve the violation of a court order.
ARGUMENT
The Respondents in this case created a contemptuous document(s) Notice of Trustee Sale
(Group Exhibit 5), the forged adjustable rate note (Exhibit 10) emailed7 The false Notice of Trustee
Sale (Group Exhibit 5), the forged adjustable rate note (Exhibit 10) was contemptuous because it
contained a willful misrepresentation(s) that were calculated to embarrass, hinder, or obstruct the court
in the administration of justice.

The Respondents were acting with intent to obstruct the DC

Appellate Court in the administration of justice. The Respondents stated in pleadings filed before this
court that .( At page 8 Defendant-Appellee Ocwen's Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary
Affirmance Doc 1526546 filed 12/10/2014)have refused and failed to take any remedial action to with
draw the fraudulent Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and the respondents stated they
intend to foreclose despite their lack of authority and despite their ongoing violations of the
Consent judgment (Doc 12).
The Respondents then, out side of the purview of this court, during the course of this litigation,
again submitted a forged Adjustable Rate Note, claiming that it was an original when the Respondents
knew or should have know that it was a forgery (Exhibit 10)
THERE IS PROBABLY CAUSE THAT THE RESPONDENTS ENGAGED IN INDRECT
CRIMINAL CONTEMPT

Probable cause is a level of reasonable belief, based on facts that can be articulated, that a
person committed the offense charged . Here, the actus reas is that a false representation was made in
7 Wire fraud in violation of the criminal Rico Statute.

the respondent email (Exhibit 9) stating that the attached adjustable rate note was a true copy of the
original when it was not see (Exhibit 12) The mens rea is that the misrepresentation was willful and
was calculated to hinder and obstruct the respondent from seeking justice before this court, during the
pendency of the on going litigation. The Respondents filed the false Notice of Trustee Sale (Group
Exhibit 5), the forged Adjustable rate Note (Exhibit 10) to thwart the administration of justice.
Now, on the record there are two conflicting Adjustable Rate Notes (Exhibit 10) and (Exhibit
12).
Given the respective motives of the Respondents and the fact that they have been sued by 49
State Attorney Generals and the Consumer Protection Bearu for identical offenses in the underlying
case, it is probable that the Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 10) is a forgery and contains the false
representations, as well as the Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5).
In light of the long history of Respondents, who have engaged in mortgage foreclosure fraud
and thwarting the administration of justice, there exists a reasonable belief that the alleged false
misrepresentation(s) contained in the Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and the forged
Adjustable Rate Note (Exhibit 10) were made willfully, and not innocently. It is clear that the
Respondents, had the motive (along with the history of making false mortgage foreclosure documents)
to make the false Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and the forged Adjustable rate Note
(Exhibit 10) in order to unlawfully foreclose on the Petitioner's said property, as the Respondents have
done thousands of times before. It is reasonable to conclude that the Respondents willfully made the
misrepresentation(s) in the said documents in order to hinder and obstruct the court in its administration
of justice. There exists a reasonable belief, based upon the facts which have been articulated, that
Respondents committed the offenses charged. The standard of probable cause has been met. The
respondents manufactured fraudulent documents a Notice of Trustee Sale (Group Exhibit 5) and an
adjustable rate note (Exhibit 10) in order to justify their fraudulent foreclosure of the Petitioners said
property.

WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that the Court immediately assign this matter for
prosecution to the U.S. Attorneys office, that a date for hearing be immediately set, that the hearing be
conducted and that the Court make findings of fact, conclusions of law and a recommendation for such
contumacious conduct is warranted by its findings. Further that the Attorney/Respondents be
immediately suspended from the practice of law before the DC Appeals Court pending a full hearing on
this Petition for Indirect criminal complaint which contains prima facie and irrefutable evidence of the
Respondents violations of the Consent Judgment (Doc 10) and indirect criminal contempt.
For the foregoing reasons, the Respondents are properly charged with the offense of indirect
criminal contempt. The court is directed to issue an order to have this case re-assigned for a hearing on
Petitioner's Petition for Indirect Criminal Contempt. To permanently enjoy the Respondents from
foreclosing on the Petitioner's said property and from ever conducting a Trustee Sale of the said
property. To stay this proceeding pending a complete hearing on Petitioner's Petition for Indirect
Criminal Contempt and to grant the Petitioner any other relief that the court feels is right and just.

/s/Christopher Stoller, Appellant/Petitioner


6045 W. Grand Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60639
312--834-9717
email Ldms4@hotmail.com
CERTIFICATION

Under penalties as provided by law, the undersigned certifies that the statements set
forth in this instrument are true and correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on
information and belief and as such matters the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he
verily believes the same to be true. And if called to testify would testify to same.
/s/ Christopher Stoller