Walsh v. Bank of New York Mellon Trust: No Standing, No Foreclosure

Editor’s Note: Mark Stopa, a highly skilled foreclosure defense attorney based in Tampa, Florida, handled this case. We also recommend his foreclosure blog at www.stayinmyhome.com.

Case: Patrick Walsh and Catherine Walsh v. Bank of New York Mellon Trust, et al.
Court: Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal
Citation: Case No. 5D15-1898 (April 21, 2017)
Opinion: Read full decision here

Key Takeaway

The Florida Fifth DCA reversed a foreclosure judgment, finding the bank failed to prove standing at inception. The case was sent back with instructions to enter an involuntary dismissal.

Court’s Reasoning

• Standing is fundamental: A foreclosing party must prove it had standing when the lawsuit was filed. This defect cannot be cured later. (McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank; Venture Holdings v. A.I.M. Funding)

• The note problems:

  • The note attached to the original complaint had no endorsements.

  • The amended complaint attached a note with an undated blank endorsement.

  • Florida law is clear: standing cannot be proven by attaching a note with an undated endorsement after the case has begun. (Focht v. Wells Fargo; Sorrell v. U.S. Bank).

• The witness issue:

  • The bank’s witness claimed the bank had possession of the note at filing.

  • But this was based only on a screenshot review — never admitted into evidence.

  • Testimony based on business records not introduced into evidence is insufficient. (Gonzalez v. BAC Home Loans).

The Result

The appellate court found the bank’s proof lacking on both the note and testimony. The foreclosure judgment was reversed and the case sent back for an involuntary dismissal.

Judges Cohen and Sawaya concurred.

Why It Matters

• Undated endorsements = red flag. Banks often try to “fix” standing problems by adding endorsements after filing. This ruling reaffirms that tactic won’t fly.

• Business records can’t just be described. If they’re not introduced into evidence, testimony about them doesn’t count.

• Borrowers can win on standing. When aggressively challenged, banks often cannot produce the documentation required to prove they had the right to foreclose in the first place.

👉 If you’re facing foreclosure, this case highlights the importance of challenging standing at inception and scrutinizing every document the bank introduces.

Need Help With Your Case?

Call us today at 844.583.5339
Submit your case statement online for a complimentary recommendation.
Visit LivingLies.me for resources and case insights.

Tags: foreclosure fraud, Walsh v Bank of New York Mellon Trust
Posted in foreclosure defenses, legal standing, Motions |