Lender Processing Services Bearish Moving Average Crossover Alert (LPS)

Lender Processing Services Bearish Moving Average Crossover Alert (LPS)

Written on Wed, 04/14/2010 – 14:36

Today, shares of Lender Processing Services (NYSE:LPS) have crossed bearishly below their 10-day moving average of $37.26 on volume of 417 thousand shares.
This may provide swing traders with an opportunity for a short position as such a crossover often suggests lower prices in the near term. Watch for a close below this moving average level for confirmation.
SmarTrend issued a Downtrend Alert for Lender Processing Services on March 31, 2010 at $38.26. In approximately 2 weeks, Lender Processing Services has returned 3.4% as of today’s recent price of $36.97.
We will continue to monitor LPS’s share price relative to this moving average.

  • After ongoing INVESTIGATIONS: Lender Processing Services (LPS) closed the offices of its subsidiary, Docx, LLC, in Alpharetta, Georgia
  • TOPAKO LOVE; LAURA HESCOTT; CHRISTINA ALLEN; ERIC TATE …Officers of way, way too many banks Part Deux “The Twilight Zone”
  • Homeowners and Attorneys Meet in Tallahassee To Celebrate Homeowner Rights And The Rule of Law


    From: Matthew Weidner Blog

    April 14th, 2010 · Foreclosure


    Florida’s Capital really is one of the prettiest buildings in this state.  Set on a huge hill, you can see it for miles around when you come driving in from any direction.  The response to calls for action from attorneys and homeowners who are coming to Tallahassee on Wednesday, April 21, 2010 has been phenomenal.  Given our great success this week, we’re all meeting in Tallahassee with a very good message to share…


    God knows we might not always agree with our judges (and from an entirely personal perspective sometimes they can lay into you like a strict and angry parent), but the bottom line is if a Floridian’s home is going to be taken from them, we want to make sure an elected judge executes that powerful order.  We want our judges and courthouses respected.  That means funding them properly so they and their staff have the time and resources to examine cases and issues carefully.  We trust our judges to be responsive to this crisis and we want our legislators to give them the tools and the respect they need to craft the solutions.  We are also proud and grateful to the legislators because:





    We will meet at 9:00 a.m. on the First Floor of the Capital, called the Plaza Level, just inside the doors between the chambers of the Florida House and Florida Senate right around the Great Seal of the State of Florida, shown  below:


    What Can You Expect in Tallahassee? Expect to be blown away.  If you’ve never been to the Capital while legislature is in session, you cannot imagine how exciting and alive the place is.  Remember all the energy and enthusiasm of college pep rallys, Superbowl or World Series, multiply it ten times, then add to it the fact that this is all very, very serious business.  Billions of dollars are at stake and changes that affect Floridians forever are made every session.

    Most times during session, the legislators are the stars, but when real people come up and do fulfill their obligations as citizens, NORMAL EVERYDAY FOLKS BECOME THE STARS! After we meet at the Great Seal at 9:00 a.m. we will travel to the Fourth Floor which is the “lobby” area between both chambers (now you know why they call it “lobbying”)…you’ll have a directory showing the floor and office number of your legislators and will fan out go to their offices.  They often won’t be in their offices, but you walk in, introduce yourself then take about two minutes to make your case to whomever is there.  If you’re lucky your representative will be there, if not take a few minutes to talk with staff….keep in mind that staff are very influential….even if your elected representative is not there….staff members are just as critical.  Write up your story and the reasons you’ve come to Tallahassee and hand them to staff/reporters/legislators.







    You can and should be prepared to make your point and move on in a few short moments….you may not convince whomever you’re talking to on the spot, but they will hear your message and respect you for understanding their time commitments and the stress they are under.  Remember, it feels like most legislators are on our side now, so please be very courteous and very grateful to them for listening to you so far….make a commitment to support them back in the district.  Ask to be put on their volunteer contact list so that they can call on you when they need help or attendance back in the district.


    It will be a whirlwind, but after a few hours of walking the halls, you’ll want to sit in the public galleries of both the house and senate side to watch all the action taking place.  At some point during the day some discussion regarding foreclosure legislation will be taken up.  Hopefully these bad bills will be killed and what will happen is members from both houses will take official notice of the hundreds, (thousands?) of their constituents who are in the galleries…they will recognize you, commend you taking time to come up and support them and the process and they will make honest commitments to work with all of us after session ends to figure a way out of this mess. At some point in time, make sure you go to the top of the Capital and see the view from high above….as I said The Capital is set on a hill and the view from up there is just amazing.  Take it all in, look around…maybe stay over a night and take more of it in….there’s certainly lots of very interesting stuff to see.

    Whatever your background, attorney, advocate, curious bystander…you will leave changed…probably inspired and hopeful~ 

    OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order!

    Lets See if the END IS NEAR for these FRAUD MILLS!


    From 4closureFraud

    Another Great Contribution by Matthew Weidner.

    Search this blog and you will see that for months now I’ve been arguing that the “evidence” submitted by Plaintiffs in foreclosure cases does not even come close to meeting the legal and evidentiary requirements for courts to grant summary judgment.

    After performing extensive legal research to confirm this hunch, I have drafted and filed detailed memoranda, supported by all available case law, that stands for the proposition that the practices used by virtually every foreclosure mill in the state do not provide the evidentiary basis for a court to grant summary judgment.


    I attach here the most fantastic transcript of a hearing I’ve heard in a long time.  This transcript shows a couple things:

    First, the judges in the Sixth Circuit of Florida really, really get it.

    Second, this particular judge goes far and above to do his job and deliver real, hard, honest legal work.

    Third, as I mentioned above…the current processes and procedures used by the foreclosure mills do not provide courts the evidentiary or legal basis required to grant summary judgment.

    But now the big question that comes to mind….now that this judge gets it…and now that my memos and others like my friend and fellow Foreclosure Fighter Mike Wasylik are starting to leak out there…

    What happens to all the hundreds of thousands of homes that have been foreclose on by improper evidence?

    Some excerpts from the begging of the transcript… Be sure to read it in its entirety. It is an absolute must read…

    Gmac Mortgage LLC


    Debbie Visicaro, et al.

    April 7, 2010

    THE COURT: Okay, we are here today in GMAC v Visicaro. This is a motion for rehearing the previously drafted motion for summary judgement…

    MR. WASYLIK: I am here for Defendants… We have submitted a fairly detailed brief…

    THE COURT: What’s the Plaintiff’s position regarding the motion…

    MR FRAISER: I object… You’ve considered all the evidence before when you entered the summary judgment back in January 2010. The opposing party then could not support their position on any genuine material facts. Right now, Your Honor, there are no convincing exigent, you know, circumstances being offered up at the time.

    THE COURT: Did you not read the motion? It sounds liker you’re making a very generalized argument, and this is an, as I viewed it, extremely targeted motion which basically elaborates on the assertions that were raised at the time of the motion for summary judgment.

    As I recall that, counsel appeared on behalf of his clients, I think it was by phone and made arguments that the Court really gave short shrift to it, did not review the case…

    Since that time, the Court delved further into it

    I’ve had several events which have occurred in cases which cause the Court to have great concern about the validity of fillings in our mortgage foreclosure cases, and that precipitated my reevaluation of the evidentiary considerations.

    I’ll give you an example of that. I have one case that was called up for summary judgment hearing, and I thought it was going to be the typical granted situation, and then a lawyer showed up for the defendant homeowner.

    I was beginning to recite to the lawyer what I had typically recited, that there was no affidavit in opposition. And the lawyer said, “Well, I thought you might want to see this,” and handed me some documents which were from another file in our circuit, and it turned out, it was the same note and mortgage that was in a separate and independent file.

    There was a different plaintiff pursuing a foreclosure proceeding on the same note and mortgage as the one that was being proceeded on. Both of the cases contained allegations in the original complaints that the separate plaintiffs were owners and holders of the note. Both of them had gone so far to have affidavits filed in support of a summary judgment whereby an individual represented to the court in the affidavit that the separate plaintiffs had possessed the note and had lost the note while it was in their possession.

    Interestedly, both affidavits, although they were different plaintiffs, purported the same facts and they were executed by the same individual in alleged capacity as a director of two separate corporations, one of which was ultimately found to me to be an assignee of the original note…

    So that really increased my interest in this subject matter, because

    I really honestly don’t have any confidence that any of the documents the Courts are receiving on these mass foreclosures are valid…

    So I’ve said enough…

    Anthony Rondolino

    Be sure to read the transcript in its entirety below…

    Judge reversed his own ruling that had granted summary judgment to GMAC Mortgage (DAVID J. STERN)

    GMAC v Visicaro Case No 07013084CI: florida judge reverses himself: applies basic rules of evidence and overturns his own order granting motion for summary judgment


    From: Neil Garfield Livinglies

    Fla Judge rehearing of summary judgement 4 04 10


    I appeared as expert witness in a case yesterday where the Judge had trouble getting off the idea that it was an accepted fact that the note was in default and that ANY of the participants in the securitization chain should be considered collectively “creditors” or a creditor. Despite the fact that the only witness was a person who admitted she had no knowledge except what was on the documents given to her, the Judge let them in as evidence.

    The witness was and is incompetent because she lacked personal knowledge and could not provide any foundation for any records or document. This is the predominant error of Judges today in most cases. Thus the prima facie case is considered “assumed” and the burden to prove a negative falls unfairly on the homeowner.

    The Judge, in a familiar refrain, had trouble with the idea of giving the homeowner a free house when the only issue before him was whether the motion to lift stay should be granted. Besides the fact that the effect of granting the motion to lift stay was the gift of a free house to ASC who admits in their promotional website that they have in interest nor involvement in the origination of the loans, and despite the obviously fabricated assignment a few days before the hearing which violated the terms of the securitization document cutoff date, the Judge seems to completely missed the point of the issue before him: whether there was a reason to believe that the movant lacked standing or that the foreclosure would prejudice the debtor or other creditors (since the house would become an important asset of the bankruptcy estate if it was unencumbered).

    If you carry over the arguments here, the motion for lift stay is the equivalent motion for summary judgment.

    This transcript, citing cases, shows that the prima facie burden of the Movant is even higher than beyond a reasonable doubt. It also shows that the way the movants are using business records violates all standards of hearsay evidence and due process. Read the transcript carefully. You might want to use it for a motion for rehearing or motion for reconsideration to get your arguments on record, clear up the issue of whether you objected on the basis of competence of the witness, and then take it up on appeal with a cleaned up record.


    Judge reversed his own ruling that had granted summary judgment to GMAC Mortgage (DAVID J. STERN)

    Judge reversed his own ruling that had granted summary judgment to GMAC Mortgage (DAVID J. STERN)

    My am news could never arrive too early from one of my favorite person. This judge unleashed a can of WHOOP ARSE!

    I think you will find this transcript very interesting.  These highlights are from a Motion for Rehearing where the Court had granted summary judgment for the lender in a foreclosure case.  The judge is Honorable Anthony Rondolino from Pinellas County, Florida.  The hearing took place on April 7, 2010.  Counsel for the homeowner/defendant, Debbie Visicaro, was  Michael Alex Wasylik.  

    The judge reversed his own ruling that had granted summary judgment to GMAC Mortgage.
    The judge noted that in a recent foreclosure summary judgment hearing, there was a different plaintiff pursuing foreclosure on the same note and mortgage in a different county.  
    In both cases, there was a count to reestablish the [lost] note and “both of them had gone so far as to have affidavits filed in support of a summary judgment whereby an individual represented to the Court in the Affidavit that the separate plaintiffs had possessed the note and had lost the note while it was in their possession.”
    “Interestingly, both affidavits, although they were different plaintiffs, purported the same facts and they were executed by the same individual in alleged capacity as a director of two separate corporations, one of which was ultimately found to be an assignee of the original note.
    So that really increased my interest in this subject matter, because I really honestly — I don’t have any confidence that any of the documents the Court’s receiving on these mass foreclosures are valid.(p.7)…

    “I guess what you’re telling me I’ve got the discretion to be – – continually be wrong.” (p.11)
    Then, (on page 15) regarding the affidavit in support of summary judgment submitted by GMAC:
    Attorney for GMAC: Paragraph Two of our Affidavit says that based upon their personal knowledge, they’re authorized to make certain statements therein.
    The Court: You know what I’d really like to see?  I’d like to see in one of these cases where a defense lawyer cross-examines, takes a deposition of these people, and we can see whether they out to be charged with perjury for all of these affidavits.(p.16)
    “I would love to see that because, I’m going to tell you the truth, I had a lawyer on the phone from Miami telling me that they’ve got somebody in their office who is authorized by reason of a power of attorney filed as a public record.  So that was supposed to be the support they have for their personal knowledge affidavits.”
    The attorney for GMAC  was Steven Frasier from the Law Offices of David Stern.