Professional Documents
Culture Documents
BANKUNITED,
as [purported] successor in interest to [failed] BANKUNITED, FSB.,
Plaintiff,
Defendants.
___________________________________________________________________/
because admittedly, “the time and manner of loss or destruction” and that “lost or destroyed”
were “unknown”.
3. Because the purported Plaintiff did not know “Counsel”, “that lost of destroyed”, and “the
time and manner of loss or destruction”, the purported Plaintiff also failed to set forth and/or
ascertain
“that the persons named in the complaint are the only persons known to plaintiff who
are interested for or against such reestablishment”. See § 71.041(5), Fla. Stat.
4. Therefore here, the purported Plaintiff failed to comply with Chapter 71, Fla. Stat., did not
reestablish any paper, and could not possibly reestablish any paper. Thus, the allegations
5. Troubled Alfred Camner, founder of bankrupt “BANKUNITED, FSB”, is not appearing for
Here, no other known “Counsel” appeared to represent the purported Plaintiff at that time.
7. In particular, Alfred Camner, and the Attorneys with troubled Camner Lipsitz under its
founder Camner, are not representing the Plaintiff. Here, “Erin M. Rose Quinn’s” record
misrepresentation appeared to be in bad faith and for deceptive purposes. While the
troubled bank’s failure had been evident for a very long time, the failed bank’s founder
Alfred Camner took improper and facially non-meritorious action against Jennifer
Franklin Prescott.
DECEPTION
8. Here, no authentic Promissory Note and/or Mortgage had ever existed. Therefore here
admittedly, no such Note or Mortgage could have possibly been “in the custody or control
of” the failed bank. Because troubled founder of the failed bank and Attorney Alfred
2
Camner had a conflict of interest, Camner and Camner Lipsitz pleaded lack of any
9. No secondary or any other evidence existed, because failed bank founder Camner could
not establish any “loss”. Troubled bank founder Camner did not know what he had
10. Bankrupt “BANKUNITED, FSB”, the purported “Plaintiff”, admitted the record absence of
“6. Said [non-existent] Promissory Note and Mortgage have been lost or destroyed
and are not in the custody or control of BANKUNITED, and the time and manner of
the loss or destruction is unknown.”
failed to satisfy “conditions precedent to the institution of” this action. Id., p. 2.
12. “Plaintiff” failed bank fraudulently pretended that the “conditions precedent to the institution
of” this facially fraudulent action “occurred” and/or had “been performed or excused”.
13. Here, said bankrupt bank, Camner Lipsitz, and/or the dismissed firm’s founder Alfred
Camner did not comply with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
14. Jennifer Franklin Prescott, who is a European citizen, holds unimpeachable title to her
3
15. For claims asserted in Federal Court against the presiding Judge, Jennifer Franklin Prescott
16. Neither the Defendant presiding judge nor any judge had any official right or Government
authority to fabricate, re-fabricate, and/or “re-establish” that which had never existed. Id.
“BANKUNITED”, law firm Camner Lipsitz filed a prima facie fraudulent “complaint”
against Prescott.
18. Here, the purported “Plaintiff’s” designations were deceptive and for the unlawful purpose of
19. Here, purported “Plaintiff” “BANKUNITED, FSB” had failed. The bankrupt bank had been
founded and mis-managed for most of its troubled history by Alfred Camner, the head of
20. A Federal shareholder class action lawsuit had targeted said Defendant Alfred Camner and
other former players at the bankrupt bank, who had allegedly deceived investors about the
21. Here, Defendant Camner’s outfit did a “significant amount of work” for “Plaintiff” bankrupt
“BANKUNITED, FSB”, while signs of the bankrupt bank’s failure had been evident for a
22. Private equity players “formed” another “BANKUNITED” to play with the assets of the
failed bank, and Alfred Camner and Camner Lipsitz were reportedly dismissed pursuant to
4
the record. The failed bank and the law firm have a dispute over legal fees pending in Miami-
Dade County Circuit Court. The bank reportedly posted a $3 million bond in that case.
23. Here, BANKUNITED itself could no longer have any confidence in troubled original
founder Alfred Camner and his failing outfit Camner Lipitz and thus dismissed said judicial
officers.
24. Here after said dismissal of Camner Lipsitz, attorneys of said firm had no authority to appear
25. Here as a matter of law and public record, failed “BANKUNITED, FSB” has been defunct.
In this case, no “mortgage” had ever been “in the custody or control of” bankrupt
“BANKUNITED, FSB”.
26. Here, “BANKUNITED” could not possibly be any “successor in interest” and/or holder of
any interest in Prescott’s record homestead, because bankrupt “BANKUNITED, FSB” had
never acquired any interest of record. Here pursuant to the record, BANKUNITED, FSB
27. Admittedly “the time and manner of the loss or destruction is unknown”, because no
“mortgage” had ever existed, and the “Plaintiff” failed bank fabricated “loss” and/or
“destruction”. Because no “mortgage” had ever been “in the custody” of bankrupt
28. Here, the failed “Plaintiff’s” fabricated “interest”, “promissory note”, and/or “mortgage” had
never existed. The Plaintiff bank and founder’s law firm fraudulently concealed “manner and
time” of the fabrication of the failed bank’s and/or law firm’s fictitious “promissory note”.
5
29. Here, the “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank fabricated “damages that exceed $15,000.00 …” See
30. Here, the bankrupt “Plaintiff” and/or court could not possibly “reestablish” and/or (re-)
31. Here, defunct bank “BANKUNITED, FSB.” perpetrated fraud upon this court and acted in
bad faith. The “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank is liable for damages and expenses.
32. Here therefore, the bankrupt bank’s “Exhibit(s)” of a non-existent and purportedly “lost”
34. Here admittedly, no valid evidence of any interest in the name of the bankrupt bank could
have possibly existed, and the failed “Plaintiff” bank perpetrated prima facie fraud on the
record.
paper;
6
6. An Order dismissing this facially fraudulent action, because “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank never
was “in the custody or control” of any valid “mortgage” before the bank failed and defrauded
7. An Order for sanctions and expenses against “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank “BANKUNITED,
8. An order removing the fired judicial officers with the Camner Lipsitz firm from these
proceedings, and striking their fraudulent pleadings, because they perpetrated said record
fraud and fraud on this Court and in particular, fraudulently pretended a lost and/or destroyed
“mortgage”.
________________________
/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott
Victim of bankrupt BANKUNITED, FSB’s record fraud and fraud on this Court
Victim of failed BANKUNITED founder Alfred Camner’s record fraud & fraud on this Court
EXHIBIT: Docket
7
7/23/2010 Public Inquiry
Find it here...
Site Search
Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - A LL / Ca se - 112009CA0060160001XX
New Se a rch
W e dne sday night is re gula r m a intena nce tim e on our se rve rs; a s a result brie f outa ge s m ay occur.
W e apologize in adva nce for a ny inconve nie nce .
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 1/1
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BANKUNITED,
as [purported] successor in interest to [failed] BANKUNITED, FSB.,
Plaintiff,
Defendants.
___________________________________________________________________/
FEDERAL SEIZURE
3. ALFRED CAMNER, troubled founder and attorney, has been in an acrimonious battle with
4. BANKUNITED Financial filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the Federal bankruptcy
code, listing total assets of $37.7 million and total debts of $559.7 million. Here,
shareholders were wiped out. BANKUNITED was sold to a group of private firms led by
7. Troubled law firm Camner Lipsitz was dismissed. Here, “Paskewicz” has no authority to
8. Given the apparent recorded chaos, “loss”, “destruction”, and cancellation of any and all
9. Purported failed “Plaintiff” asserted that the time and manner of purported loss and
destruction were “unknown”. Thereby, “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank failed to comply with
10. If the holder of an instrument destroys it, he thereby forgives and discharges any debt. Here
11. The holder may not maintain an action based upon the purportedly destroyed
instrument. Here, any pretended instrument was discharged by cancellation. See also
District of Columbia v. Cornell, 130 US 655, 32 L ed 1041, 9 S Ct 694; State Street Trust Co.
2
v Muskogee Electric Traction Co. (CA10 Okla) 204 F2d 920; 11 Am Jur 2d BILLS AND
NOTES; § 913.
CORRUPT INTENT
12. “Plaintiff” failed bank had corrupt intent to obtain illegal benefits to “avoid” failure and
misrepresent assets.
13. Troubled Alfred Camner, founder of bankrupt “BANKUNITED, FSB”, is not appearing for
Here, no other known “Counsel” appeared to represent the purported Plaintiff at that time.
15. In particular, Alfred Camner, and the Attorneys with troubled Camner Lipsitz under its
founder Camner, are not representing the Plaintiff. Here, “Erin M. Rose Quinn’s” record
misrepresentation appeared to be in bad faith and for deceptive purposes. While the
troubled bank’s failure had been evident for a very long time, the failed bank’s founder
Alfred Camner took improper and facially non-meritorious action against Jennifer
Franklin Prescott.
DECEPTION
16. Here, no authentic Promissory Note and/or Mortgage had ever existed. Therefore here
admittedly, no such Note or Mortgage could have possibly been “in the custody or control
of” the failed bank. Because troubled founder of the failed bank and Attorney Alfred
Camner had a conflict of interest, Camner and Camner Lipsitz pleaded lack of any
3
17. No secondary or any other evidence existed, because failed bank founder Camner could
not establish any “loss”. Troubled bank founder Camner did not know what he had
because admittedly, “the time and manner of loss or destruction” and that “lost or destroyed”
were “unknown”.
20. Because the purported Plaintiff did not know “Counsel”, “that lost of destroyed”, and “the
time and manner of loss or destruction”, the purported Plaintiff also failed to set forth and/or
ascertain
“that the persons named in the complaint are the only persons known to plaintiff who
are interested for or against such reestablishment”. See § 71.041(5), Fla. Stat.
21. Therefore here, the purported Plaintiff failed to comply with Chapter 71, Fla. Stat., did not
reestablish any paper, and could not possibly reestablish any paper. Thus, the allegations
4
FAILED “BANKUNITED, FSB” ADMITTEDLY FABRICATED “MORTGAGE”
22. Bankrupt “BANKUNITED, FSB”, the purported “Plaintiff”, admitted the record absence of
“6. Said [non-existent] Promissory Note and Mortgage have been lost or destroyed
and are not in the custody or control of BANKUNITED, and the time and manner of
the loss or destruction is unknown.”
failed to satisfy “conditions precedent to the institution of” this action. Id., p. 2.
24. “Plaintiff” failed bank fraudulently pretended that the “conditions precedent to the institution
of” this facially fraudulent action “occurred” and/or had “been performed or excused”.
25. Here, said bankrupt bank, Camner Lipsitz, and/or the dismissed firm’s founder Alfred
Camner did not comply with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
26. Jennifer Franklin Prescott, who is a European citizen, holds unimpeachable title to her
27. For claims asserted in Federal Court against the presiding Judge, Jennifer Franklin Prescott
28. Neither the Defendant presiding judge nor any judge had any official right or Government
authority to fabricate, re-fabricate, and/or “re-establish” that which had never existed. Id.
5
29. Purportedly on behalf of “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank “BANKUNITED, FSB”, and/or
“BANKUNITED”, law firm Camner Lipsitz filed a prima facie fraudulent “complaint”
against Prescott.
30. Here, the purported “Plaintiff’s” designations were deceptive and for the unlawful purpose of
31. Here, purported “Plaintiff” “BANKUNITED, FSB” had failed. The bankrupt bank had been
founded and mis-managed for most of its troubled history by Alfred Camner, the head of
32. A Federal shareholder class action lawsuit had targeted said Defendant Alfred Camner and
other former players at the bankrupt bank, who had allegedly deceived investors about the
33. Here, Defendant Camner’s outfit did a “significant amount of work” for “Plaintiff” bankrupt
“BANKUNITED, FSB”, while signs of the bankrupt bank’s failure had been evident for a
34. Private equity players “formed” another “BANKUNITED” to play with the assets of the
failed bank, and Alfred Camner and Camner Lipsitz were reportedly dismissed pursuant to
the record. The failed bank and the law firm have a dispute over legal fees pending in Miami-
Dade County Circuit Court. The bank reportedly posted a $3 million bond in that case.
35. Here, BANKUNITED itself could no longer have any confidence in troubled original
founder Alfred Camner and his failing outfit Camner Lipitz and thus dismissed said judicial
officers.
6
36. Here after said dismissal of Camner Lipsitz, attorneys of said firm had no authority to appear
37. Here as a matter of law and public record, failed “BANKUNITED, FSB” has been defunct.
In this case, no “mortgage” had ever been “in the custody or control of” bankrupt
“BANKUNITED, FSB”.
38. Here, “BANKUNITED” could not possibly be any “successor in interest” and/or holder of
any interest in Prescott’s record homestead, because bankrupt “BANKUNITED, FSB” had
never acquired any interest of record. Here pursuant to the record, BANKUNITED, FSB
39. Admittedly “the time and manner of the loss or destruction is unknown”, because no
“mortgage” had ever existed, and the “Plaintiff” failed bank fabricated “loss” and/or
“destruction”. Because no “mortgage” had ever been “in the custody” of bankrupt
40. Here, the failed “Plaintiff’s” fabricated “interest”, “promissory note”, and/or “mortgage” had
never existed. The Plaintiff bank and founder’s law firm fraudulently concealed “manner and
time” of the fabrication of the failed bank’s and/or law firm’s fictitious “promissory note”.
41. Here, the “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank fabricated “damages that exceed $15,000.00 …” See
42. Here, the bankrupt “Plaintiff” and/or court could not possibly “reestablish” and/or (re-)
7
DEFUNCT BANKUNITED, FSB., PERPETRATED FRAUD ON THIS COURT
43. Here, defunct bank “BANKUNITED, FSB.” perpetrated fraud upon this court and acted in
bad faith. The “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank is liable for damages and expenses.
44. Here therefore, the bankrupt bank’s “Exhibit(s)” of a non-existent and purportedly “lost”
46. Here admittedly, no valid evidence of any interest in the name of the bankrupt bank could
have possibly existed, and the failed “Plaintiff” bank perpetrated prima facie fraud on the
record.
2. An Order declaring that Camner Lipsitz and/or its Attorneys are not any Counsel”
8. An Order dismissing this facially fraudulent action, because “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank never
was “in the custody or control” of any valid “mortgage” before the bank failed and defrauded
8
9. An Order for sanctions and expenses against “Plaintiff” bankrupt bank “BANKUNITED,
10. An order removing the fired judicial officers with the Camner Lipsitz firm from these
proceedings, and striking their fraudulent pleadings, because they perpetrated said record
fraud and fraud on this Court and in particular, fraudulently pretended a lost and/or destroyed
“mortgage”.
________________________
/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott
Victim of bankrupt BANKUNITED, FSB’s record fraud and fraud on this Court
Victim of failed BANKUNITED founder Alfred Camner’s record fraud & fraud on this Court