707220.0129/6386701.1

LANE POWELL PC

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200

PAGE 1 - DECLARATION OF BRIAN T. KIOLBASA IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ 

REPLY BRIEFS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT

Robert E. Maloney, Jr., OSB No. 670856

maloneyr@lanepowell.com

Pilar C. French, OSB No. 962880

frenchp@lanepowell.com

Brian T. Kiolbasa, OSB No. 112890

kiolbasab@lanepowell.com

LANE POWELL PC

601 SW Second Avenue, Suite 2100

Portland, Oregon 97204-3158

Telephone: 503.778.2105

Facsimile: 503.778.2200

Attorneys for Bank of America, N.A., and

Wells Fargo Bank, National Association

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF OREGON

PORTLAND DIVISION

COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH,

Plaintiff,

v.

MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC 

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., a 

Delaware corporation; MERSCORP 

HOLDINGS, INC., previously MERSCORP., 

INC.; BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., dba 

BANC OF AMERICA INVESTMENT 

SERVICES, INC., a Florida corporation;

JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., a 

Delaware corporation; CITIMORTGAGE, 

INC., a New York corporation; EVERBANK 

MORTGAGE COMPANY, a division of 

EVERBANK, a Florida corporation;

SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC., a Virginia 

corporation; WELLS FARGO BANK, 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, a foreign 

corporation; WMC MORTGAGE 

CORPORATION, a California corporation;

CITIZENS BANCORP, dba CITIZENS 

Case No. 3:15-cv-01246-PK

DECLARATION OF BRIAN T. KIOLBASA 

IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ REPLY 

BRIEFS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTIONS 

FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 1 of 27
707220.0129/6386701.1

LANE POWELL PC

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200

PAGE 2 - DECLARATION OF BRIAN T. KIOLBASA IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ 

REPLY BRIEFS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT

BANK, an Oregon corporation; and WEST 

COAST BANCORP, dba WEST COAST 

BANK, an Oregon corporation; and U.S. BANK 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, an Ohio 

corporation,

Defendants.

MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC 

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.,

Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff,

v.

COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant,

and

FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE 

CORPORATION,

and

FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE 

ASSOCIATION,

Counterclaim-Defendants.

I, Brian T. Kiolbasa, declare and state as follows: 

1. I am a member at Lane Powell PC and one of the attorneys for defendants Bank 

of America, N.A. (“BANA”), and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo”). I make this 

declaration based on my own personal knowledge and in support of the following summary 

judgment reply briefs filed by defendants in this action:

 Reply Brief In Support of Defendants’ Motions for Summary Judgment on 

(1) Ultra Vires Lawsuit, (2) County’s Conduct, (3) No Damages, (4) Claims I-VI, 

(5) Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, and (6) Punitive Damages;

 Reply Brief In Support of Defendants Bank of America, N.A. and Wells Fargo 

Bank, N.A.’s Partial Motion for Summary Judgment – Vicarious Liability;

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 2 of 27
707220.0129/6386701.1

LANE POWELL PC

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200

PAGE 3 - DECLARATION OF BRIAN T. KIOLBASA IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ 

REPLY BRIEFS IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY 

JUDGMENT

 Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary

Judgment on All Claims. 

2. Attached hereto as Exhibit 64 is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the 

transcript of the deposition of Jeff Sageser, testifying on behalf of Deschutes County, Oregon, 

which took place on May 22, 2015. 

3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 65 is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the 

transcript of the deposition of Ralph Marle Hoehne, testifying on behalf of Lane County, 

Oregon, which took place on June 11, 2015. 

4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 66 is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the 

transcript of the deposition of Tassi O’Neil, testifying on behalf of the Oregon Association of 

County Clerks, which took place on May 29, 2015. 

5. Attached hereto as Exhibit 67 is a true and correct copy of excerpts from the 

transcript of the deposition of Brenda Giesselmann, testifying on behalf of Wells Fargo Bank, 

N.A., which took place on March 25, 2015. 

6. Attached hereto as Exhibit 68 is a true and correct copy of a General Judgment of 

Foreclosure issued in Wells Fargo Bank, NA v. Bratcher et al., Multnomah County Circuit Court 

Case No. 1209-11175. 

7. Attached hereto as Exhibit 69 is a true and correct copy of a Stipulated General 

Judgment of Foreclosure issued in Wells Fargo Bank, NA v. Beard et al., Multnomah County

Circuit Court Case No. 1207-08910. 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true 

and correct.

DATED: July 9, 2015

 /s/ Brian T. Kiolbasa 

 Brian T. Kiolbasa

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 3 of 27
Page 1

· · ·IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

· · · · ·IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH,· · · · · )

· · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · · )

· · ·v.· · · · · · · · · · · ·) No.1212-16328

MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC· · · · · ·) Volume 1

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.,· ·) Pages 1-99

et al.,· · · · · · · · · · · ·)

· · · · · Defendants.· · · · ·)

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )

· · · · · · ·DEPOSITION OF JEFF SAGESER

· · · · · · · · · ·May 22nd, 2015

· · · · · · · · · · · ·Friday

· · · · · · · · · · · 9:08 A.M.

· · · · ·THE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JEFF SAGESER

was taken at Deschutes Country Offices, 1300 NW Wall

Street, 2nd Floor, Bend, Oregon, before Deborah M.

Bonds, CSR-RPR, Certified Shorthand Reporter in and

for the State of Oregon.

Page 2

· · · · · · · · · · APPEARANCES

For the Witness:

· · Deschutes County Legal Counsel

· · 1300 NW Wall Street, Suite 205

· · Bend, Oregon 97701

· · 541/388-6625

· · BY: DAVID DOYLE

· · david.doyle@deschutes.org

For Plaintiff County of Multnomah:

· · D'AMORE LAW GROUP

· · 4230 Galewood Street, Suite 200

· · Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035

· · 503/222-6333

· · BY: NICK KAHL

· · nick@damorelaw.com

For Defendants Bank of America and Wells Fargo:

· · LANE POWELL PC

· · 601 SW 2nd Avenue, Suite 2100

· · Portland, Oregon 97204

· · 503/778-2100

· · BY:· PILAR FRENCH

· · frenchp@lanepowell.com

For Defendants MERS and MERSCORP:

· · DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE

· · 1300 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2400

· · Portland, Oregon 97201

· · 503/778-5328

· · BY:· GREGORY A. CHAIMOV

· · gregorychaimov@dwt.com

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · (continued)

Page 3

(continued)

For Defendants U.S. Bank National Association:

· · DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP

· · 701 5th Avenue, Suite 6100

· · Seattle, Washington· 98104

· · 206/903-8870

· · BY:· AMY STERNER NELSON (via phone)

· · sterner.amy@dorsey.com

For Defendants WMC Mortgage and JP Mortgage Chase

Bank, NA:

· · BUCKLEY SANDLER, LLP

· · 1250 24th Street NW, Suite 700

· · Washington, DC 20037

· · 202/349-8061

· · BY: ANDREW R. LOUIS (via phone)

Also Present:

· · ROBIN CASSIDY-DURAN, VIDEOGRAPHER

· · MADOLYN CRUMPTON (via phone)

Reported by:

· · DEBORAH M. BONDS, CSR-RPR

· · CC REPORTING & VIDEOCONFERENCING

· · EUGENE· · · ·541/485-0111

Page 4

· · · · · · · · · · · INDEX

WITNESS.........................................PAGE

JEFF SAGESER

· · ·BY MS. FRENCH· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·7,211

· · ·BY MR. CHAIMOV· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 195

· · ·BY MR. KAHL· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·198

EXHIBITS........................................PAGE

No. 1· · Letter and deposition subpoena· · · · · ·10

No. 2· · Deed of trust· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 87

No. 3· · Email string· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 148

No. 4· · Article· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·153

No. 5· · Bend Bulletin article· · · · · · · · · ·155

No. 6· · Email string· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 156

No. 7· · Email, 11/19/12· · · · · · · · · · · · ·158

No. 8· · Email string· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 159

No. 9· · Document re: MERS· · · · · · · · · · · ·160

No. 10· ·Email with MERS statistics· · · · · · · 162

No. 11· ·Trust deeds with MERS chart· · · · · · ·166

No. 12· ·MERS talking points· · · · · · · · · · ·167

No. 13· ·MERS talking points final· · · · · · · ·174

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(continued)

Exhibit 64 

Page 1

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 4 of 27
Page 25

·1· · · · · ·And I'm just generally speaking here.· We

·2 will look to see whether or not it's -- if it's

·3 legible for us to capture and then reproduce for the

·4 public.· We will look to see whether or not there

·5 are adequate fees for accepting the document for

·6 recording.

·7· · ·Q.· · You mentioned that there was a document

·8 submitted in connection with a nonjudicial

·9 foreclosure pertaining to proofs of service.· Is

10 that correct?

11· · ·A.· · No.· Affidavit of service.

12· · ·Q.· · Okay.· There's -- okay.· So there's a

13 document submitted for recording in connection with

14 a nonjudicial foreclosure which consists of an

15 affidavit of service.

16· · ·A.· · Yes.

17· · ·Q.· · Do you review that document to confirm

18 that service has actually been --

19· · ·A.· · No.

20· · ·Q.· · -- affected on everyone?

21· · ·A.· · No.

22· · ·Q.· · What you're looking for is different.· You

23 have a list of things that you're looking for.

24 Right?

25· · ·A.· · Correct.

Page 26

·1· · ·Q.· · You're not examining -- you're not

·2 examining that document and confirming that what it

·3 says actually happened.

·4· · ·A.· · That's correct.

·5· · ·Q.· · You are checking to make sure you've got a

·6 signature, that it's notarized and acknowledged,

·7 that it's legible, and that it's recordable.· Is

·8 that correct?

·9· · ·A.· · Reproducible.· Eligibility turns into

10 reproducibility and don't forget the fees.

11· · ·Q.· · And fees.· Okay.· And when you get

12 something like an affidavit of service for a

13 nonjudicial foreclosure, do you index it?

14· · ·A.· · I typically don't, but our recorders do.

15· · ·Q.· · Okay.

16· · ·A.· · Our office does.

17· · ·Q.· · Okay.

18· · ·A.· · One of our recorders does.· Let me just

19 also jump in.· I will mention that Deschutes County

20 is unique in the sense that we have a program

21 through our software vendor, Helion, we have

22 autoindexing.

23· · ·Q.· · I was going to ask you about that.

24· · ·A.· · And I would have to say that the rules

25 that have been set up don't favor affidavits.

Page 27

·1· · ·Q.· · Okay.

·2· · ·A.· · So the index is rather incomplete.

·3· · ·Q.· · So I was -- actually, I think I saw

·4 something in the documents about the autoindexing.

·5 Can you tell me what that is?

·6· · ·A.· · Autoindexing is software that our vendor

·7 makes available to counties using their recording

·8 system that takes a document, OCR's it, in other

·9 words, it will scan it for searchable text, and it

10 will apply a set of rules to the text that it finds

11 and probably uses some fancy algorithms to find out

12 how close or approximate names are to descriptive --

13 other descriptive words to extract an index to be

14 placed in the clerk's searchable index.

15· · ·Q.· · What -- let's shift to a deed of trust, so

16 you can tell me what these descriptive words are

17 that the software looks for.

18· · ·A.· · It will look for -- primarily what we're

19 doing is populating an index, a direct and indirect

20 index.· I believe the statute refers to them as

21 grantors and grantees.· And the -- the deed of

22 trust, I would -- I haven't seen the set of rules,

23 but it will look for the words "beneficiary," and it

24 will look for the words "lender."· It will look for

25 the words "borrower," "grantor," "grantee."· And

Page 28

·1 there may be some others as well, but I would say

·2 that that's probably most of it.

·3· · ·Q.· · How long have you been doing -- how long

·4 has Deschutes County been autoindexing?

·5· · ·A.· · Autoindexing, I'm guessing -- Oh, boy.

·6 Good question.· It's been more than about seven

·7 years.

·8· · ·Q.· · Are you one of the only counties that does

·9 that?

10· · ·A.· · I believe so.

11· · ·Q.· · Is the trustee indexed?

12· · ·A.· · It is not.· The trustee for a deed of

13 trust, we do not index the trustee.

14· · ·Q.· · Why is that, if you know?

15· · ·A.· · It's more of a historical practice, and so

16 I wouldn't recall why it would have ever been not

17 indexed.

18· · ·Q.· · Okay.· Is the purpose of the indexing to

19 identify the parties to the trust deed?

20· · ·A.· · I would say that's part of it, and more so

21 that it's locatable and searchable by the public.

22· · ·Q.· · Okay.· So you don't -- the index -- the

23 purpose of the -- tell me what -- you tell me what

24 the purpose of indexing is.

25· · ·A.· · For our office and -- well, the purpose of

Exhibit 64 

Page 2

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 5 of 27
Page 29

·1 the index is to help locate a public record. I

·2 liken it -- when I've been trying to explain to

·3 others, I would use the analogy:· If you were to go

·4 into a library and you were to try to locate a

·5 book --

·6· · ·Q.· · Uh-huh.

·7· · ·A.· · -- and you went up to a librarian and

·8 said, "Where is this book?"· They may not know, but

·9 they have a tool to use, and that tool would be a

10 card catalog reader -- for those that are of the old

11 school.· And they would locate that card catalog

12 reader, pull out the index card, and there would be

13 a notation of where they could locate that document.

14 So that's the purpose of the index.

15· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And so as long as the index can

16 tell you where to obtain the record, the index is

17 sound.

18· · · · · · · ·MR. KAHL:· Objection --

19· · ·A.· · I wouldn't --

20 BY MS. FRENCH:

21· · ·Q.· · Go ahead.· You can -- he's going to --

22 he's going to object every now and then when he

23 doesn't like the wording of a question, but you can

24 go ahead and answer.

25· · ·A.· · Could rephrase the -- or repeat the

Page 30

·1 question for me, please?

·2· · ·Q.· · Well, I'm just trying to understand the

·3 purpose of the index.· The index is to locate public

·4 records and you, being Deschutes County, with Helion

·5 autoindex and retrieve certain pieces of information

·6 from the original document that's being recorded,

·7 whatever that is, so that you can then later find

·8 it.· Right?· If somebody wants to see it.· Correct?

·9· · ·A.· · Correct.

10· · ·Q.· · But you may not have every key piece of

11 information in the index that is actually contained

12 in the document.· It's just enough so that you can

13 find it.· Right?

14· · ·A.· · We follow ORS 205.160 in populating our

15 index.

16· · ·Q.· · And that statute tells you what to index?

17· · ·A.· · Correct.

18· · ·Q.· · And is that the statute that speaks in

19 terms of direct and indirect parties?

20· · ·A.· · It does.

21· · ·Q.· · Do you have a copy of that -- does --

22 strike that.

23· · · · · ·Do the clerk's have a copy of that statute

24 on hand?

25· · ·A.· · Yes.

Page 31

·1· · ·Q.· · So if they need to look at something, it

·2 -- well, strike that.

·3· · · · · ·What's the purpose of having it on hand?

·4· · ·A.· · I'm sorry.· Repeat that?

·5· · ·Q.· · What is the purpose of having that statute

·6 on hand?

·7· · ·A.· · So we can follow the guidance that the

·8 legislature has provided us.

·9· · ·Q.· · Okay.· So I'm looking at ORS 205.160 --

10· · ·A.· · Let me just mention one additional thing.

11 The Chapter 205 are the duties of the county clerk.

12 So under 205, we would presume that there's guidance

13 for us to follow in carrying out our assignments, if

14 you will.

15· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And I'm looking at 205.106 [sic] --

16 you've read this statute before?

17· · ·A.· · I have.

18· · · · · · · ·MR. DOYLE:· 160?

19· · · · · · · ·MS. FRENCH:· 205.160?

20· · · · · · · ·MR. DOYLE:· Yeah.· You said 106 --

21· · · · · · · ·MS. FRENCH:· Oh, I'm sorry.

22· · · · · · · ·MR. DOYLE:· -- so I just wanted to

23 make sure we had the right one.

24· · · · · · · ·MS. FRENCH:· I'm going to do that a

25 few times today.

Page 32

·1 BY MS. FRENCH:

·2· · ·Q.· · Subsection 1 says (reading):· The

·3· · county clerk shall keep a direct general

·4· · index and an indirect general index in the

·5· · office of the clerk.

·6· · · · · ·Can you tell me what the difference is

·7 between a general index and an indirect general

·8 index?

·9· · ·A.· · Well, if it might be helpful, we do look

10 at Section 7 in following because it does mention

11 that in lieu of the direct -- excuse me -- general

12 indirect and direct, if a county uses, believe it or

13 not, a data processing system, which we do use, then

14 that is the method or the process that we follow.

15 So I believe that it's 7 -- subsection 7 under 160

16 that we follow.

17· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And so Subsection 7 -- I'll read it

18 to you just so that we're all talking about the same

19 thing -- I'm sorry.· I don't have a copy.

20· · · · · · · ·MR. DOYLE:· I have a copy here.

21· · · · · · · ·MS. FRENCH:· Oh, okay.· Well, if he

22 wants to look at one, that's fine with me.

23 BY MS. FRENCH:

24· · ·Q.· · (Reading):· In lieu of both the

25· · direct and -- you've pretty much quoted it

Exhibit 64 

Page 3

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 6 of 27
Page 73

·1 it's available in a bookcase in paper form if it --

·2 if we don't have access to our computers so --

·3· · ·Q.· · Do you have weekly meetings or staff

·4 meetings or anything like that?

·5· · ·A.· · We have monthly meetings, uh-huh.

·6· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And during those monthly meetings,

·7 have you ever discussed MERS?

·8· · ·A.· · I believe when the two Supreme Court cases

·9 were decided, I believe there was a conversation

10 about the Supremes kind of decided on two cases that

11 were involving MERS, and we haven't really done too

12 much to change anything in our practices.· And I did

13 also share, I believe, at one meeting that I was

14 going to conference and sharing some information

15 about that.

16· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And what is it -- I know you've

17 monitored this Brandrup and Niday -- these cases --

18 but what does the county do to monitor the law with

19 regard to recording issues?· Is there any special

20 protocol?

21· · ·A.· · No, there isn't.· I would find it

22 helpful -- several years ago external auditors would

23 come in and see how we assessed fees and whether

24 those were collected and appropriated to the right

25 agencies, but that hasn't happened for some time.

Page 74

·1· · ·Q.· · So talk -- speaking about the fees, how

·2 are the fees allocated?

·3· · ·A.· · The fees -- the recording fees are

·4 collected -- I'll just say that the clerk's office

·5 will get basically $5 per page of a document to

·6 record.· The additional fees that would be collected

·7 will be for affordable housing; will be for a corner

·8 preservation, a surveyor's fee; assessment and

·9 taxation, which goes to state, and some is returned.

10· · · · · ·A portion of the recorder's fee, the $5,

11 there's a 5 percent fee that is dedicated for record

12 preservation, technology, upgrading of the software,

13 storage -- you know, purchase of storage cabinets,

14 whatever the clerk may need, so there's a dedicated

15 fee that's associated with the $5 so --

16· · ·Q.· · So the fees are for providing the public

17 service of recording?

18· · ·A.· · The clerk's office fee is associated --

19 yeah.

20· · ·Q.· · Okay.

21· · ·A.· · I can only speak to that.

22· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And if somebody -- if I have a

23 trust deed -- if I have a deed of trust, and I want

24 to make sure I have priority, that I stay first in

25 line -- nobody else is loaned against the

Page 75

·1 property -- I need to record it.· Right?

·2· · · · · · · ·MR. KAHL:· I'm going to object that it

·3 calls for a legal conclusion.

·4· · ·A.· · I wouldn't --

·5 BY MS. FRENCH:

·6· · ·Q.· · You can answer, if you know.

·7· · ·A.· · Yeah.· I wouldn't be able to answer that

·8 question.

·9· · ·Q.· · Okay.· You don't know what the purpose of

10 recording a trust deed is?

11· · ·A.· · I do.

12· · ·Q.· · What is the purpose?

13· · ·A.· · I would say for the clerk's office, the

14 purpose for -- and I'm just speaking within the

15 duties of the county clerk -- is to preserve the

16 permanent record, make those records available for

17 public inspection.

18· · ·Q.· · But do you --

19· · ·A.· · I would -- I would only presume that there

20 are other purposes that other people could speak to.

21· · ·Q.· · So you don't know what the purpose of

22 recording a trust deed is?

23· · · · · · · ·MR. KAHL:· I'm going to object.· It's

24 asked and answered.

25· · · · · · · ·MS. FRENCH:· I just want to confirm

Page 76

·1 I'm understanding.

·2· · · · · · · ·MR. DOYLE:· Do you understand the

·3 question?

·4· · ·A.· · The purpose of a trust deed to be recorded

·5 is to -- well, some may say to perfect the document

·6 and make it available for public inspection and to

·7 give constructive notice.

·8 BY MS. FRENCH:

·9· · ·Q.· · Okay.· Perfect the document -- what was

10 your second?· Make it -- make a record?

11· · ·A.· · Make it available for public inspection.

12· · ·Q.· · Okay.· Make it available for public

13 inspection.· And what was the --

14· · ·A.· · Which may very well be constructive

15 notice.

16· · ·Q.· · And then constructive notice.· What's

17 constructive notice?

18· · ·A.· · To give someone an understanding that

19 something is -- they're on notice of an event, an

20 occurrence, something exists.

21· · ·Q.· · Okay.

22· · ·A.· · So to bring someone into knowledge of

23 something or make them aware of something.

24· · ·Q.· · And what is perfecting the document?

25· · ·A.· · I wouldn't be able to speak to that

Exhibit 64 

Page 4

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 7 of 27
Page 77

·1 because it's not a concern of the clerk's office.

·2· · ·Q.· · So the clerk's office may record documents

·3 and it may have an effect of perfection, but the

·4 clerk's office isn't providing any kind of legal

·5 stamp or approval indicating that that's in fact

·6 what has happened.· There's no representation to

·7 that effect.

·8· · ·A.· · Correct.

·9· · ·Q.· · That would be between the parties to

10 whatever the instrument is.· Right?· That would be

11 their issue.

12· · ·A.· · I wouldn't be able --

13· · · · · · · ·MR. KAHL:· Object.· Calls for a legal

14 conclusion.

15· · · · · · · ·MR. DOYLE:· Did you complete your

16 answer?

17· · ·A.· · I wouldn't be able to speak to that.

18 BY MS. FRENCH:

19· · ·Q.· · Okay.· There's no requirement to record a

20 deed of trust, is there?

21· · · · · · · ·MR. DOYLE:· Do you understand the

22 question?· Whose requirement, I guess I would ask.

23 But do you understand the question as phrased?

24· · ·A.· · We're not reaching out to make any

25 determination whether something is required or not.

Page 78

·1 BY MS. FRENCH:

·2· · ·Q.· · Right.

·3· · ·A.· · So I can't speak to the requirement that

·4 someone may be looking at, whether they're -- so as

·5 a receiving party and performing ministerial

·6 functions, we're not looking out at someone needing

·7 to do something.· So if it's requiring them or if

·8 it's not requiring them --

·9 BY MS. FRENCH:

10· · ·Q.· · Okay.· So you don't ever do a land search,

11 make sure people have recorded all documents that

12 need to go -- that need to be recorded for whatever

13 reason?· That's not the county's prerogative?

14· · ·A.· · Correct.

15· · ·Q.· · And if somebody takes out -- if

16 somebody -- if I give Mr. Chaimov a deed of trust

17 against my property, and he decides not to record

18 it, that's his issue.· Right?

19· · ·A.· · I would say that I would presume it might

20 be his issue.

21· · ·Q.· · It wouldn't be an issue for Deschutes

22 County.

23· · ·A.· · It wouldn't an issue for Deschutes County.

24· · ·Q.· · And Deschutes County wouldn't be banging

25 on his door and demanding that he come record it so

Page 79

·1 that it can collect the fee.

·2· · ·A.· · Correct.

·3· · ·Q.· · Now, you mentioned earlier that there's

·4 several ways for presenting documents for recording.

·5 You said you in person, mail, or online?

·6· · ·A.· · Correct.

·7· · ·Q.· · And what percentage of each method is

·8 used?

·9· · ·A.· · Good question.

10· · ·Q.· · If you know.

11· · ·A.· · I would say about 60, 65 percent are

12 electronic.· The other is -- roughly 25 plus is

13 through the mail, and then the other is over the

14 counter.

15· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And how long has Deschutes been

16 using the electronic method?

17· · ·A.· · It was about the same time -- 2000 --

18 2009, 2010.· We've been doing it for three, four

19 years.

20· · ·Q.· · And there's a time requirement, once a

21 document is recorded and indexed, to return the

22 original.· Correct?

23· · ·A.· · Correct.

24· · ·Q.· · And is it like -- is it ten days?

25· · ·A.· · It's ten days.

Page 80

·1· · ·Q.· · And has Deschutes County been able to meet

·2 that requirement?

·3· · ·A.· · Yes.

·4· · ·Q.· · Has there ever been a time when it wasn't

·5 meeting that requirement?

·6· · ·A.· · There may have been a day or two.· We

·7 pride ourselves in returning original documents, and

·8 so there may have been one or two days in about 15

·9 years that we haven't met the ten days.

10· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And when a deed of trust is

11 presented for recording, who usually presents the

12 document?

13· · ·A.· · Usually?

14· · ·Q.· · Uh-huh.

15· · ·A.· · I have no idea.· Title companies is where

16 we get most of our records, the submission of our

17 records, and they submit those electronically, but

18 we get them all over the countryside.

19· · ·Q.· · Okay.· Are you supposed to keep track of

20 who submits the document to you?

21· · ·A.· · Yes.

22· · ·Q.· · And -- were you going to add something?

23· · ·A.· · I was going to say, we are required in our

24 index of where to return the original document, but

25 we have also who has paid for the document, who has

Exhibit 64 

Page 5

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 8 of 27
Page 105

·1· · · · · · · ·(Beginning Volume 2.)

·2

·3· · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're back on the

·4 record at 12:51 p.m.

·5 BY MS. FRENCH:

·6· · ·Q.· · Sorgeson [sic].· Right?

·7· · ·A.· · Sageser.

·8· · ·Q.· · Saget?

·9· · ·A.· · Sageser.

10· · ·Q.· · Sageser.· Mr. Sageser -- sorry about that.

11· · ·A.· · You're not alone.

12· · ·Q.· · Okay.· We're back on the record, and

13 you're still under oath, just as you were this

14 morning.· Do you understand that?

15· · ·A.· · Yes.

16· · ·Q.· · Have you ever had to correct information

17 about a recorded document?

18· · ·A.· · We maintain the index.

19· · ·Q.· · Okay.

20· · ·A.· · So corrections to the index have been made

21 after -- even after verification, if it's brought to

22 our attention that a correction needs to be made,

23 we'll look into it and make the correction.

24· · ·Q.· · And how -- and how do you make that

25 correction?

Page 106

·1· · ·A.· · We pull up the document, and we make a

·2 correction to -- most likely a typographical error.

·3 That's where most of them are found.

·4· · ·Q.· · So you can -- you can manually do that

·5 right in the -- in the software system?

·6· · ·A.· · Yes.

·7· · ·Q.· · You just queue it up and change it and hit

·8 save?

·9· · ·A.· · Yes.

10· · ·Q.· · You don't -- does it cost anything to do

11 that?

12· · ·A.· · No.

13· · ·Q.· · And if there's a concern about having MERS

14 indexed as an indirect party, could you work with

15 Helion to come up with some sort of macro to fix

16 that and to remove them as an indirect party?

17· · · · · · · ·MR. KAHL:· I'm going to object that

18 that's a vague question.

19· · ·A.· · I could work with any of our vendors if a

20 change was necessary.· They're very bright folks.

21 BY MS. FRENCH:

22· · ·Q.· · And has Deschutes County inquired about

23 the cost of making that kind of change?

24· · ·A.· · No.

25· · ·Q.· · Okay.· We talked earlier about the purpose

Page 107

·1 of recording, and you said that one of the purposes

·2 was perfection?

·3· · ·A.· · (Witness nodded.)

·4· · ·Q.· · Deschutes County does not guarantee

·5 perfection.· Is that correct?

·6· · ·A.· · Correct.

·7· · ·Q.· · So is doesn't -- it provides the service

·8 of recording, but perfection may be an effect of

·9 recording.· Is that correct?

10· · ·A.· · Could be.

11· · ·Q.· · And so would it be fair to say that

12 Deschutes County does not provide the service of

13 perfecting a lien?

14· · ·A.· · It's certainly not one of our -- we don't

15 advertise that in any nature, and we wouldn't be

16 asked, "What are you doing here?"· We wouldn't -- it

17 wouldn't come to a normal conversation saying,

18 "Well, we're perfecting the documents."· That's

19 outside of our -- yeah.

20· · ·Q.· · You mentioned Helion as your vendor for

21 indexing?

22· · ·A.· · No.· They -- our recording system is done

23 by -- is written by Helion, and they have provided a

24 module in which our documents are sort of tested

25 against, if you will, a set of rules called

Page 108

·1 autoindexing so -- and we license that software

·2 so --

·3· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And is there -- let me just put it

·4 this way.· Is that the only service that they

·5 provide -- that Helion provides, or do they provide

·6 other services to you?

·7· · ·A.· · There -- they provide an assessment and

·8 taxation component to the assessor's office and

·9 the -- our tax office.· It's called ORCATS.

10· · ·Q.· · Do they -- you mentioned that there's some

11 stuff -- that there's some data that you can enter

12 into the system that doesn't go into the index?

13· · ·A.· · Yes.

14· · ·Q.· · Does Helion provide the software interface

15 for that?

16· · ·A.· · Yes.

17· · ·Q.· · And when documents are electronically

18 submitted to you, does that come through a Helion

19 interface?

20· · ·A.· · Yes.

21· · ·Q.· · Is it fair to say that your entire system

22 of recording is based on Helion software?

23· · ·A.· · Real property, yes.· We have other

24 recording functions that do not use software

25 provided by -- or made by -- developed by Helion.

Exhibit 64 

Page 6

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 9 of 27
Page 1

· · ·IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

· · · · ·IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH,· · · · · )

· · · · · Plaintiff,· · · · · )

· · ·v.· · · · · · · · · · · ·) No.1212-16328

MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC· · · · · ·) Volume 1

REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC.,· ·) Pages 1-144

et al.,· · · · · · · · · · · ·)

· · · · · Defendants.· · · · ·)

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )

· · · · · · · · · · ·ORCP 39C(6)

· · · · · DEPOSITION OF LANE COUNTY, OREGON

· · · · · · · · BY RALPH MARLE HOEHNE

· · · · · · · Thursday, June 11th, 2015

· · · · · · · · · · · 9:24 A.M.

· · · · ·THE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF RALPH MARLE

HOEHNE was commenced at Lane County Offices, 125 East

8th Avenue, Eugene, Oregon, before Deborah M. Bonds,

CSR-RPR, Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for the

State of Oregon.

Page 2

· · · · · · · · · · APPEARANCES

For the Witness:

· · LANE COUNTY COUNSELS OFFICE

· · 125 East 8th Avenue

· · Eugene, Oregon 97401

· · 541/682-6561

· · BY:· STEPHEN E. DINGLE

· · stephen.dingle@co.lane.or.us

For Plaintiff County of Multnomah:

· · D'AMORE LAW GROUP

· · 4230 Galewood Street, Suite 200

· · Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035

· · 503/222-6333

· · BY: NICK KAHL

· · nick@damorelaw.com

For Defendants Bank of America and Wells Fargo:

· · GOODWIN PROCTER

· · 901 New York Avenue, N.W.

· · Washington, D.C. 20001

· · 202/346-4143

· · BY:· JOSEPH F. YENOUSKAS

· · jyenouskas@goodwinprocter.com

For Defendants MERS and MERSCORP:

· · DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE

· · 1300 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2400

· · Portland, Oregon 97201

· · 503/778-5328

· · BY:· GREGORY A. CHAIMOV

· · gregorychaimov@dwt.com

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · (continued)

Page 3

(continued)

For Defendants U.S. Bank National Association:

· · DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP

· · 701 5th Avenue, Suite 6100

· · Seattle, Washington· 98104

· · 206/903-8870

· · BY:· AMY STERNER NELSON (via phone)

· · sterner.amy@dorsey.com

For Defendants WMC Mortgage and JP Mortgage Chase

Bank, NA:

· · BUCKLEY SANDLER, LLP

· · 1250 24th Street NW, Suite 700

· · Washington, DC 20037

· · 202/349-8061

· · BY:· ANDREW R. LOUIS (via phone)

For Defendant CitiMortgage, Inc.:

· · MAYER BROWN LLP

· · 71 South Wacker Drive

· · Chicago, Illinois 60606

· · 312/701-8821

· · BY:· THOMAS P. EVANS

· · tevans@mayerbrown.com (via phone)

Also Present:

· · ROBIN CASSIDY-DURAN, VIDEOGRAPHER

· · MADOLYN CRUMPTON (via phone)

Reported by:

· · DEBORAH M. BONDS, CSR-RPR

· · CC REPORTING & VIDEOCONFERENCING

· · EUGENE· · · ·541/485-0111

Page 4

· · · · · · · · · · · INDEX

WITNESS.........................................PAGE

RALPH MARLE HOEHNE

· · ·BY MR. YENOUSKAS· · · · · · · · · · · · · 7,214

· · ·BY MR. CHAIMOV· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 200

· · ·BY MR. KAHL· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·200,222

EXHIBITS........................................PAGE

No. 1· · Declaration of custodian of records· · · ·8

No. 2· · Notice of deposition· · · · · · · · · · · 9

No. 3· · Document Receiving, Batching, and· · · · 57

· · · · ·Receipting Procedures

No. 4· · Document type list· · · · · · · · · · · ·67

No. 5· · Lane County website printout· · · · · · ·71

No. 6· · Deed of trust· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 83

No. 7· · Screen print of Helion index· · · · · · ·88

No. 8· · Deed of trust· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 89

No. 9· · Screen print of Helion index· · · · · · ·92

No. 10· ·Email string· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·94

No. 11· ·Memo and Bev Smith email· · · · · · · · ·97

No. 12· ·Email string, 4/27/11· · · · · · · · · ·104

No. 13· ·Email string, 6/8/11· · · · · · · · · · 107

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · (continued)

Exhibit 65 

Page 1

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 10 of 27
Page 53

·1· · ·A.· · Yes.

·2· · ·Q.· · Do you know how other counties treat the

·3 indexing of MERS?

·4· · ·A.· · No.

·5· · ·Q.· · Okay.· No idea at all?

·6· · ·A.· · Well, no.· Actually, no, not really. I

·7 mean --

·8· · ·Q.· · It's not been a topic of discussion with

·9 the Clerks Association?

10· · ·A.· · Well, I think it has been topic of

11 discussion, but I couldn't sit here and tell you

12 that Douglas County does it in a certain way. I

13 don't know that.

14· · ·Q.· · Oh, no.· And I'm not asking for specific

15 counties but, for example, do you know that some

16 other counties do it a different way?

17· · ·A.· · I would -- it would not surprise me to

18 learn that other counties do things differently. I

19 mean, we hear it from submitters all the time.

20· · ·Q.· · Right.· So it's not a black-and-white

21 process?

22· · ·A.· · No.

23· · ·Q.· · Take a quick break.· We've been going for

24 a while.· Five-minute break?

25· · ·A.· · Yes.

Page 54

·1· · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· One moment, please.

·2· · · · · · · ·MR. YENOUSKAS:· My voice gets tired.

·3· · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We've off the

·4 record at 10:21 a.m.

·5· · · · · · · ·(Recess: 10:21 to 10:37 a.m.)

·6· · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We're back on the

·7 record at 10:37 a.m.

·8 BY MR. YENOUSKAS:

·9· · ·Q.· · Mr. Hoehne, we didn't discuss one other

10 part of your deed of trust, the trustee.

11· · ·A.· · Yes.

12· · ·Q.· · You're aware that a trustee is a party to

13 a deed of trust?

14· · ·A.· · Yes.

15· · ·Q.· · Does Lane County index the trustee in

16 either the grantor or the grantee indices?

17· · ·A.· · No.

18· · ·Q.· · Why is that?

19· · ·A.· · Because they're neither the grantor nor

20 the grantee.

21· · ·Q.· · And how was that determination made?

22· · ·A.· · I don't know how to answer the question.

23 I mean, we treat -- we treat the grantee as the

24 beneficiary or the lender or the nominee, and the

25 grantor is the borrower.· The trustee doesn't fall

Page 55

·1 into either of those categories so we don't index

·2 the trustee.

·3· · ·Q.· · Do you know whether the trustee is granted

·4 any rights under a deed of trust?

·5· · ·A.· · No, not going to make legal

·6 determinations.

·7· · ·Q.· · Okay.· Now, you mentioned that the

·8 documents are scanned.

·9· · ·A.· · They are.

10· · ·Q.· · How long has that been going on for?

11· · ·A.· · Since -- well, since 1999, and we've --

12 since we really started with using the Helion

13 software system, and we've since gone back to

14 mid-'90s, I think, that we've converted images back.

15· · ·Q.· · So there's a process underway to go back

16 into the past and make digitized images?

17· · ·A.· · There is.

18· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And is that sill ongoing?

19· · ·A.· · It is, slowly.

20· · ·Q.· · Slow process?· And is Helion doing that

21 for you?

22· · ·A.· · Well, we're doing it ourselves actually.

23· · ·Q.· · Okay.· And prior to the earliest date that

24 you have digitized images, in what form are the

25 images?

Page 56

·1· · ·A.· · Microfilm.

·2· · ·Q.· · Microfilm.· And how far do those images go

·3 back?

·4· · ·A.· · Well, they -- they go back to the

·5 beginning of recording in Lane County.

·6· · ·Q.· · So everything has been microfilmed.

·7· · ·A.· · Yes.· Everything has been filmed.

·8· · ·Q.· · Now, we've been talking about this process

·9 of recording documents in which Lane County receives

10 a fee for the service of recording the document.

11· · ·A.· · Uh-huh.

12· · ·Q.· · Have you ever heard of a service called

13 perfecting a lien?

14· · ·A.· · Well, I mean, I've heard the term before.

15· · ·Q.· · Does Lane County perfect liens?

16· · ·A.· · Not that I know of.

17· · ·Q.· · You don't charge a fee for a service

18 called perfecting a lien?

19· · ·A.· · No, sir.

20· · ·Q.· · Okay.· You don't have policies and

21 procedures for perfecting liens?

22· · ·A.· · No.

23· · ·Q.· · Okay.· Not a service the county provides,

24 in other words?

25· · ·A.· · No.

Exhibit 65 

Page 2

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 11 of 27
Page 1

· · IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

· · · · IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH,· · · · · · )

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )

· · · · · · ·Plaintiff,· · · · ·)

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )

· · · v.· · · · · · · · · · · · )· No. 1212-16328

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )

MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION)

SYSTEMS, INC., et al.,· · · · · )

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · )

· · · · · · ·Defendants.· · · · )

· · · · · · · · · · ORCP 39C(6)

· · · ·DEPOSITION OF THE OREGON ASSOCIATION

· · · · · · · · ·OF COUNTY CLERKS

· · · · · · · · · BY TASSI O'NEIL

· · · · · · · · · ·May 29, 2015

· · · · · · · · · · · Friday

· · · · · · · · · · ·9:12 A.M.

· · · · · THE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF TASSI

O'NEIL was taken at Local Government Center, 1201

Court Street Northeast, Salem, Oregon, 93701,

before Jan R. Duiven, CSR, FCRR, CCP, Certified

Shorthand Reporter in and for the State of Oregon.

Page 2

· · · · · · · · · · APPEARANCES

For the Plaintiff:

· · · D'AMORE LAW GROUP

· · · 4230 Galewood Street, Suite 200

· · · Lake Oswego, Oregon 97035

· · · 503/222-6333

· · · BY:· MR. NICK KAHL

· · · nick@damorelaw.com

· · · MS. MADOLYN CRUMPTON

· · · 2007 3rd Avenue N.

· · · Birmingham, Alabama 35203

· · · crumptonlaw@gmail.com

· · · 205/250-0010

· · · (Appearing by phone)

For Defendants Bank of America, N.A., EverHome

Mortgage Company, and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.:

· · · GOODWIN PROCTER LLP

· · · 53 State Street

· · · Boston, Massachusetts 02109-2802

· · · 617/570-1000

· · · BY:· MS. YVONNE W. CHAN

· · · ychan@goodwinprocter.com

For Defendants MERS, Inc., and MERSCORP Holdings:

· · · DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP

· · · 1300 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 2400

· · · Portland, Oregon 97201

· · · 503/778-5328

· · · BY:· MR. GREGORY A. CHAIMOV

· · · gregorychaimov@dwt.com

For the Deponent:

· · · MR. ROB BOVETT

· · · Association of Oregon Counties

· · · 1201 Court Street NE, Suite 300

· · · Salem, Oregon 97301

· · · 503/585-8351

· · · rbovett@aocweb.org

Page 3

· · · · · · · · · · APPEARANCES

For Defendant WMC Mortgage Corporation,

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., and Chase Home Mortgage

Corporation:

· · · BUCKLEY SANDLER

· · · 1250 24th Street NW, Suite 700

· · · Washington, DC 20037

· · · 202/349-8061

· · · BY:· MR. ANDREW R. LOUIS

· · · alouis@buckleysandler.com

· · · (Appearing by phone)

For Defendant CitiMortgage, Inc.:

· · · MAYER BROWN LLP

· · · 71 South Wacker Drive

· · · Chicago, Illinois 60606

· · · 312/701-8821

· · · BY:· MR. THOMAS P. EVANS

· · · tevans@mayerbrown.com

· · · (Appearing by phone)

For Defendant U.S. Bank in its capacity as

Securitization Trustee:

· · · LARKINS VACURA LLP

· · · 1251 SW Morrison Street, Suite 700

· · · Portland, Oregon 97204

· · · 503/542-3104

· · · BY:· MR. WILLIAM L. LARKINS

· · · wlarkins@larkinsvacura.com

· · · (Appearing by phone)

For Defendant U.S. Bank in its individual

capacity:

· · · DORSEY & WHITNEY

· · · Columbia Center

· · · 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6100

· · · Seattle, Washington 98104

· · · 206/903-8870

· · · MS. AMY NELSON

· · · sterner.nelson.amy@dorsey.com

· · · (Appearing by phone)

Page 4

· · · · · · · · · · APPEARANCES

For Defendant SunTrust Mortgage:

· · · SNELL & WILMER

· · · One Arizona Center

· · · 400 East Van Buren Street, Suite 1900

· · · Phoenix, Arizona 85004

· · · 602/382.6310

· · · BY:· MS. AMANDA JENKINS

· · · ajenkins@swlaw.com

· · · (Appearing by phone)

The Videographer:

· · · MR. DAVID MCGINNIS

Reported by:

· · · JAN R. DUIVEN, CSR, FCRR, CCP

Exhibit 66 

Page 1

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 12 of 27
Page 61

·1· · · · Q.· · Is MERS -- or was MERS one of those

·2· items?

·3· · · · A.· · Yes.

·4· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Beginning from around the time

·5· that it was formed?

·6· · · · A.· · Yes.· I believe so.

·7· · · · · · · · ·MR. KAHL:· We're about an hour in

·8· right now.· Do you need a break?

·9· · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Sure.

10· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· And we're going

11· off the record.

12· · · · · · · · ·(Recess:· 10:17 a.m. to 10:26 a.m.)

13· · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· And we're back on

14· the record.· Counsel may proceed.

15· · · · · · · · ·MS. CHAN:· Thank you.

16· BY MS. CHAN:

17· · · · Q.· · Ms. O'Neil, do you recall the NACRC

18· affiliate reporting back at any of the OACC

19· meetings during any of the time that you were a

20· member about MERS?

21· · · · A.· · Not specifically, no.

22· · · · Q.· · What about the -- and I'm going to get

23· this wrong -- but the I --

24· · · · A.· · IACREOT.

25· · · · Q.· · IACREOT.

Page 62

·1· · · · A.· · I don't recall specifically.

·2· · · · Q.· · And PRIA?

·3· · · · A.· · I don't recall that specifically

·4· either.

·5· · · · Q.· · Were there discussions at any of the

·6· OACC meetings about the loss of recording fees?

·7· · · · A.· · Yes.

·8· · · · Q.· · Okay.· What was the discussion?

·9· · · · A.· · That as the keeper of the records, the

10· assignments were not being recorded in the

11· counties' records, therefore, the fees were --

12· were not being given to the counties to record

13· those documents.

14· · · · Q.· · Was there a discussion at those

15· meetings about whether assignments were required?

16· · · · A.· · I don't recall.

17· · · · Q.· · The discussion about the fees that

18· were then paid, was it a discussion about whether

19· those fees should have been paid or -- or what --

20· just tell me more about what was discussed.

21· · · · A.· · Anytime a document is recorded,

22· there's recording fees that are not only -- that

23· we collect that the county gets a small portion

24· of, and fees that go on to state agencies as well

25· and others.· And if those assignments were not

Page 63

·1· being recorded, those fees were not being passed

·2· on to those agencies.

·3· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Who sets the fees?

·4· · · · A.· · There's statute -- statutes of

·5· different fees for different items, as well as

·6· counties set some of their own fees.

·7· · · · Q.· · And the fees are paid each time a

·8· document is recorded?

·9· · · · A.· · Yes.

10· · · · Q.· · Was there any discussion about whether

11· there was a way to get those fees?

12· · · · A.· · Can you repeat the question?

13· · · · Q.· · Sure.· You said that there was -- that

14· the discussion was about fees that weren't being

15· paid because assignments weren't being recorded.

16· Was there a discussion about whether there was a

17· way to get the fees to be paid?

18· · · · A.· · I believe there was discussion about

19· those documents that hadn't been recorded to see

20· if there was a way to have them be recorded, as

21· well as there were lawsuits within the United

22· States that were happening.

23· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Tell me what you mean by see if

24· there's a way to have them being recorded.

25· · · · A.· · In -- in general, as counties, we like

Page 64

·1· to have documents recorded within our office as

·2· we're the keeper of the records and it keeps the

·3· chain of title clean.· And if a document's not

·4· recorded, we, of course, would like it to be

·5· recorded so that when the public or title

·6· companies, attorneys, anyone looking at those

·7· records would see how that chain of title is

·8· complete.

·9· · · · Q.· · So that's something you would prefer

10· to have happen?

11· · · · A.· · Absolutely.

12· · · · Q.· · Can you force it?

13· · · · A.· · Not specifically, no.

14· · · · Q.· · So there are -- there may be other

15· cases not involving MERS where you know that

16· assignments aren't being recorded for a particular

17· property or particular deed of trust.· Is there

18· anything you can do about that?

19· · · · A.· · No.

20· · · · · · · · ·MR. KAHL:· Wait.· When you're asking

21· her can she do it, are you asking her as the

22· president of OACC or as the Tillamook County

23· clerk?

24· · · · · · · · ·MS. CHAN:· Well, she was following

25· up her previous question about what we would --

Exhibit 66 

Page 2

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 13 of 27
Brenda Giesselmann 1

Freedom Court Reporting, Inc 877-373-3660

 1 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

 2 FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

 3 _______________________________________________________

 4 COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH, Case No. 1212-16328

 5 Plaintiff,

 6 vs.

 7 MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC

 8 REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., a

 9 Delaware corporation; MERSCORP

 10 HOLDINGS, INC, previously

 11 MERSCORP, INC.; BANK OF AMERICA,

 12 N.A., dba BANC OF AMERICA

 13 INVESTMENT SERVICES, INC., a Florida

 14 Corporation;

 15

 16 (Case caption continues on next page)

 17 _______________________________________________________

 18

 19 ORCP 39 C(6) VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITION OF

 20 BRENDA GIESSELMANN

 21 Taken March 25, 2014

 22 Commencing at 9:09 a.m.

 23

 24

 25 REPORTED BY: MARY P. MITCHELL, RDR, CRR, CLR

Exh bit 67 

Page 1

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 14 of 27
Brenda Giesselmann 45

Freedom Court Reporting, Inc 877-373-3660

 1 because she has to keep up with you on the reporting.

 2 A. Sorry.

 3 MR. HEFFERON: No problem.

 4 A. "MERS signing officers should understand the

 5 difference between recording and registering a mortgage

 6 loan. Mortgages, deed of trust, security deeds are

 7 recorded in the applicable public land records.

 8 Recording is done in order to perfect a security

 9 instrument and to establish priority ahead of other

 10 secured creditors. Mortgage loan information is

 11 registered on either the MERS System or MERS

 12 Commercial, depending on the type of loan.

 13 Registration is done in order to track changes in

 14 servicing rights and beneficial ownership interests in

 15 mortgage loans. Registering the mortgage loan

 16 information on the MERS System or MERS Commercial is

 17 separate and apart from the function that the county

 18 recorders perform."

 19 Q. All right. And then it says underneath that

 20 there are three types of loans registered on the MERS

 21 System. You have a loan closed on a security

 22 instrument where MERS is the original mortgagee, known

 23 as a MOM loan. And if I use the term "MOM" today, are

 24 you familiar with that?

 25 A. Yes.

Exh bit 67 

Page 2

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 15 of 27
Brenda Giesselmann 46

Freedom Court Reporting, Inc 877-373-3660

 1 Q. All right. And then you have loans where the

 2 lien is assigned to MERS post-closing. And that's a

 3 non-MOM loan, is that correct?

 4 A. Yes.

 5 Q. All right. And then loans registered solely

 6 for tracking where MERS is not the mortgagee or the

 7 assignee, known as iRegistration. Are you familiar

 8 with all three of those?

 9 A. Yes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Exh bit 67 

Page 3

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 16 of 27
Exhibit 68 

Page 1

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON 

FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH 

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, ) 

) 

Plaintiff, ~ CaseN~-11175 

vs. ) [~GENERAL JUDGMENT OF 

) FORECLOSURE 

DAVID BRATCHER NKJA DAVID J. ) 

BRATCHER; TRACI BRATCHERNK/A ) 

TRACI A. BRATCHER; STATE OF OREGON;) 

AND OCCUPANTS OF THE PREMISES, ) 

) 

Defendants. ) _______________________________ ) 

13 The Court finds that an Order granting Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, NA's ("Wells Fargo") 

14 Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs Complaint for Deed of Trust Foreclosure, as 

15 against defendants David Bratcher, a/k/a David J. Bratcher, Traci Bratcher, a/k/a Traci A. 

16 Bratcher and Occupants of the Premises, was entered on October 3, 2013. Now therefore, the 

17 Court being fully advised in the premises and finding that a General Judgment of Foreclosure 

18 should be entered in favor of Wells Fargo based upon the following findings, reasons, and 

19 conclusions by the Court: 

20 1. David Bratcher and Traci Bratcher executed and delivered to EverHome Mortgage 

21 Company a promissory note in the amount of $171,112 (the "Note"). 

22 2. At the same time and place as the execution and delivery of the Note, and as part of 

23 the same transaction, David Bratcher and Traci Bratcher, the then owner of the real property 

24 described in Exhibit 1 attached hereto (the "Property"), executed and delivered a Deed of Trust 

25 ("Deed of Trust") to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. solely as nominee for 

26 

PAGE 1 - [PROPOSED] GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0105/5815449.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 17 of 27
Exhibit 68 

Page 2

EverHome Mortgage Company. The Deed of Trust was recorded in the official Multnomah 

2 County records on October 2, 2008, as document No. 2008-139297. 

3 3. Sometime thereafter the Note and Deed of Trust were sold or assigned to plaintiff, 

4 who is the current holder of the Note and assignee of the Deed of Trust, as noted by the Corporate 

5 Assignment of Deed of Trust duly recorded in the official Multnomah County records on 

6 February 22,2012, as document No. 2012-020199. 

7 4. David Bratcher and Traci Bratcher breached the tenns of the Note and Deed of 

8 Trust by failing to make a voluntary monthly payment which was due on October 1, 2011, and 

9 making no voluntary payments on the Note and Deed of Trust since that date. Therefore, the Note 

10 and Deed of Trust are in default. 

11 5. On or about September 5, 2012, plaintiff commenced this action. On 

12 September 5, 20 12, plaintiff then caused to be recorded a Notice of Pendency of an Action in the 

13 Multnomah County Land Records under Recorder No. 2012-111872 ("Notice of Lis Pendens"). 

14 6. An Order placing defendant State of Oregon in default was entered herein on 

15 December 24, 2012. 

16 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, DECLARED AND ADJUDGED: 

17 1. Plaintiff is entitled to the entry of judgment against defendants David Bratcher 

18 alk/a David J. Bratcher, Traci Bratcher alk/a Traci A. Bratcher, State of Oregon, ass OccupaW:i 

19 <* the Premiies, foreclosing any interest they may claim or have claimed in or to the Property 

20 (1429 NE La Mesa Avenue, Gresham, Oregon 97030), more fully described in Exhibit 1 hereto. 

21 2. The Deed of Trust is a valid lien for the amount of plaintiffs judgment as set 

22 forth in Paragraph 4 below against the Property and fixtures located thereon and rents and leases 

23 relating thereto and situated in Multnomah County, Oregon, and that lien is superior to any 

24 interest, lien, or claim of any defendant, their successors, assigns or any purchasers or holders of 

25 any interest or encumbrances arising after October 2, 2008, in the Property described in 

26 Exhibit I, or its fixtures, rents, or leases. 

PAGE 2 - [PROPOSED] GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0 I 05/5815449.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

60 I SW SECOND A VENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAK 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 18 of 27
Exhibit 68 

Page 3

3. The Deed of Trust is hereby foreclosed and all interests and/or claims held by 

2 defendants or their successors or assigns, including purchasers and/or holders of encumbrances, 

3 arising on or after October 2, 2008, in the Property or its fixtures, rents, and/or leases shall be 

4 sold by the Sheriff of Multnomah County, Oregon, in the manner provided by law and in 

5 accordance with the practice of this Court. 

6 4. All rights, title and interest of defendants, and all persons claiming through or 

7 under defendants, as purchasers, encumbrancers, or otherwise, are forever foreclosed of all 

8 interest, lien or claim in the Property, and every portion thereof, including any statutory right of 

9 redemption as defendants may have herein, as provided by Oregon law, which right defendants 

10 David Bratcher and Traci Bratcher specifically agree to waive. 

11 5. For purposes of allowing a credit bid to be made at any foreclosure or execution 

12 sale, Judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff in the principal amount of $165,430.16, plus 

13 accrued interest to August I, 2013, in the amount of $21,402.65, plus interest on the principal 

14 amount from August 2, 2013, at the rate of 6.75% per annum until entry of judgment, plus 

15 recoverable costs and fees (including, but not limited to, costs associated with escrow advances 

16 and late charges) in the amount of $7,641.08, and attorneys' fees and costs in the amount of 

17 $19,768.65, and a Writ of Execution shall issue therefor against the property, fixtures, rents 

18 and/or leases and not against any defendant personally. 

19 6. The proceeds of the sale shall be applied first towards the costs of sale, then 

20 toward the satisfaction of the judgment amount set forth in Paragraph 4 above, then the surplus, 

21 if any, to the clerk of the court to be distributed to any other party or parties as may establish 

22 their right and priority thereto. 

23 

24 

25 

26 

6. Plaintiff is permitted to become a bidder and purchaser at the foreclosure sale, and 

plaintiff or any subsequent purchaser shall be entitled to immediate possession of the Property. 

If the Ptopett' is not so vacated, the Comt hereby mdets t:ke Glef'k sitae Cetn"': to issHe a 'Mit 6'f- 8 

...as:ristance ordenng the Sheriff to dehver possession of ffie :Property to piaintiff or to any 

PAGE 3 - [PROPOSED] GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0 I 05/5815449.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 19 of 27
Exhibit 68 

Page 4

1 ~ehaser upon V\ltitteft rettttest ey f'laintiff 6f }'ttreha~er to the Clerk ef the Cumt and1+ithottt 

2 

3 

M'l' ft:il"tfl:er mder neeessft0· ftom tfie Celirt. The Court shall retam jatisdietioft ef tHis matter 

ue.til Dttviel Bratcher arU17or I rac1 Bratcher, and/UI any J'eFseHs eeelif'~'iHg tfie Pref)erty with4 "them, Hft"ve vacated the fJruperty and me sale IS completed. 

5 7. The defendants and each of them, and all persons claiming through or under 

6 defendants, as purchasers, encumbrancers, or otherwise, are forever foreclosed of all interest, 

7 lien, or claim in the Property and every portion thereof. 

8 8. Defendants David Bratcher's and Traci Bratcher's Counterclaim is dismissed with 

9 prejudice. 

10 9. The Court finds there is no just reason for delay of the entry of judgment and 

11 directs entry of final judgment on Wells Fargo's claims against Defendants as set forth herein. 

16 Submitted by: 

17 Julie M. Engbloom, OSB No. 066988 

Lane Powell PC 

18 Of Attorney for Plaintiff 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

PAGE 4- [PROPOSED] GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0 I 05/58 I 5449. I 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 20 of 27
Exhibit 68 

Page 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

2 I hereby certify that on January 2, 2014, I caused to be served a copy of the foregoing 

3 [PROPOSED] GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE on the following person(s) in the 

4 manner indicated below at the following address(es): 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

Mr. David J. Bratcher 

1429 NE La Mesa A venue 

Gresham, OR 97030 

Telephone: (503) 970-1107 

Pro se defendant 

State of Oregon 

c/o Department of Justice 

1162 Court Street NE 

Salem, OR 97301 

0 byCM/ECF 

0 by Electronic Mail 

0 by Facsimile Transmission 

~ by First Class Mail 

0 by Hand Delivery 

0 by Overnight Delivery 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

707220.0 I 05/58154491 

Mrs. Traci A. Bratcher 

1429 NE La Mesa A venue 

Gresham, OR 97030 

Telephone: (503) 970-1107 

E-Mail: traci. bratcher@comcast.net 

Pro se defendant 

Occupants of the Premises 

1429 NE LaMesa A venue 

Gresham, OR 97030 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 21 of 27
Exhibit 69 

Page 1

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

ENTERED 

iN REGISTER CDR 

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON 

FOR THE COUNTY OF MUL TNOMAH 

WELLS FARGO BANK, N .A., its successors in ) 

interest and/ or assigns, ) 

) Case No. 1207-08910 

Plaintiff, ) 

) STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF 

vs. ) FORECLOSURE 

) 

HAROLD F. BEARD, JR., AKA HAROLD ) 

FINDL Y BEARD; NATIONAL CITY BANK, ) 

NKA PNC BANK, NATIONAL ) 

ASSOCIATION; and Occupants of the Premises,) 

) 

Defendants. ) _______________________________) 

14 Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("plaintiff') and defendant Harold F. Beard, Jr., aka 

15 Harold Findly Beard ("defendant"), acting by and through their respective counsel of record, 

16 hereby stipulate that plaintiff is entitled to entry of final judgment in its favor by reason of all 

17 requests for relief against all parties and for the following reasons: 

18 1. On or about March 21, 2007, defendant executed and delivered to Directors 

19 Mortgage Inc. a promissory note in the amount of$411,975.00 (the "Note"). 

20 2. At the same time and place as the execution and delivery of the Note, and as part of 

21 the same transaction, defendant, the then owner of the real property located at 6014 Southwest 

22 View Point Terrace, Portland, Oregon 97239, and legally described as follows: 

23 Lot 15, Block 5, Southport, Portland, Multnomah County, Oregon 

24 (the "Property"), executed and delivered a Deed of Trust ("Deed of Trust") to Mortgage Electronic 

25 Registration Systems, Inc., solely as nominee for Directors Mortgage Inc. and its successors and 

26 

PAGE 1 - STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0140/5915666.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND A VENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 22 of 27
Exhibit 69 

Page 2

1 ass1gns. The Deed of Trust was recorded in the official Multnomah County records on March 27, 

2 2007, as document number 2007-053285. 

3 3. Sometime thereafter, the Note and Deed of Trust were sold or assigned to plaintiff, 

4 who is the current holder of the Note and assignee of the Deed of Trust, as noted by the Assignment 

5 of Deed of Trust duly recorded in the official Multnomah County records on April 20, 2009, as 

6 document number 2009-053468. 

7 4. Defendant breached the terms of the Note and Deed of Trust by failing to make a 

8 voluntary monthly payment which was due on May 1, 2011, and making no voluntary payments on 

9 the Note and Deed of Trust since that date. Therefore, the Note and Deed ofTrust are in default. 

10 5. A Limited Judgment of Foreclosure against National City Bank, nk:a PNC Bank, 

11 National Association, was entered herein on March 14, 2013. 

12 6. An Order dismissing defendant Harold F. Beard, Jr.'s Third Counterclaim for 

13 common law fraud was entered herein on October 10,2013. 

14 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADIDDGED that: 

15 1. Plaintiff is entitled to the entry of judgment against all defendants herein, 

16 foreclosing any interest they may claim or have claimed in or the Property. Plaintiffs judgment 

17 against defendant National City Bank, nk:a PNC Bank, National Association is not for any costs 

18 or money based upon the default entered against it. 

19 2. The Deed of Trust recorded in the Multnomah County public records on 

20 March 27, 2007, as document number 2007-053285 is a valid lien for the amount of plaintiffs 

21 judgment as set forth in the Money Award below against the Property and fixtures located 

22 thereon and rents and leases relating thereto and situated in Multnomah County, Oregon, and that 

23 lien is superior to any interest, lien, or claim of any defendant in that real property, fixtures, 

24 rents, or leases. 

25 3. The Deed of Trust is foreclosed and all interest that defendants, and all claims 

26 held by defendants or their successors or assigns, including purchasers and/or holders of 

PAGE 2 - STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0140/5915666.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

60 I SW SECOND A VENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 23 of 27
Exhibit 69 

Page 3

1 encumbrances, and arising on or after March 21, 2007, in the Property or its fixtures, rents, 

2 and/or leases shall be sold by the sheriff of Multnomah County, Oregon in the manner provided 

3 by law and in accordance with the practice of this Court. 

4 4. Defendant is not entitled to a homestead exemption as against plaintiffs Deed of 

5 Trust. 

6 5. Pursuant to the Money Award below, Judgment is entered in the principal amount 

7 of$442,495.47, plus escrow advance in the amount of$14,058.28, plus accumulated late charges 

8 in the amount of $1,179.84, plus accumulated fees in the amount of $5,297.04, plus interest to 

9 September27, 2013, in the amount of$22,017.62, and from September28, 2013, at the rate of2 

10 percent per annum ($24.25 per day) until entry of judgment, as well as $3,544.50 in attorneys' 

\,41UY\ ~~A.f1'k'!M~ _[) 

11 fees, costs, and disbursements, and a Writ of Execution shall issue therefor. )JI( 

1\. 

12 6. The proceeds of the sale shall be applied first towards the costs of sale, then 

13 toward the satisfaction of the judgment amount set forth in the Money Award below, then the 

14 surplus, if any, to the clerk of the court to be distributed to any other party or parties as may 

15 establish their right and priority thereto. 

16 7. If the proceeds of sale are insufficient to satisfy plaintiffs Money Award in full, 

17 plaintiff has no right to recover the deficiency against defendant pursuant to ORS 86.770(2). 

18 8. Plaintiff is permitted to become a bidder and purchaser at the foreclosure sale and 

19 may bid up to the aggregate amount of its Money Award, plus interest, from the date of 

20 judgment until sale without advancing any cash except money required for the sheriffs fees and 

21 costs of sale. 

22 9. The purchaser of the Property at the sheriffs sale is entitled to exclusive and 

23 immediate possession of the Property from and after the date of the sale, and is entitled to such 

24 remedies as are available at law to secure possession of the Property, and that the Judgment 

25 entered herein shall have the same effect as a writ of assistance, if any of the defendants or any 

26 

PAGE 3 - STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0140/5915666.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND A VENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 24 of 27
Exhibit 69 

Page 4

1 other party or person shall refuse to surrender possession of the property to the purchaser 

2 immediately on the purchaser's demand for possession. 

3 10. Defendant Harold F. Beard, Jr.'s remaining Counterclaims are hereby dismissed 

4 with prejudice. 

5 MONEY AWARD 

6 1. 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

2. 

13 3. 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

4. 

5. 

7. 

8. 

Judgment Creditor: 

Judgment Creditor's Attorney: 

Judgment Debtor: 

Other Person/Entity Entitled 

to Portion of Judgment: 

Amount of Judgment: 

Pre-Judgment Interest: 

Post judgment Interest: 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. 

c/o Peter D. Hawkes 

Lane Powell PC 

601 SW Second Avenue, Suite 2100 

Portland, OR 97204-3158 

Peter D. Hawkes 

Lane Powell PC 

601 SW Second Avenue, Suite 2100 

Portland, OR 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 

Harold F. Beard, Jr. 

6014 Southwest View Point Terrace 

Portland, OR 97239 

Year ofbirth: 1961 

Final four digits of Social Security number: 3771 

Final four digits of driver license number: 1787 

Attorney: None 

None 

$463,030.63 

$22,017.62, plus interest at the rate of$24.75 per 

day from September 28, 2013 to entry of judgment. 

9 percent simple interest on the sum ofthe amounts 

as set forth in paragraphs 5 and 6 above. 

PAGE 4- STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0140/5915666.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 25 of 27
Exhibit 69 

Page 5

1 9. Costs, disbursements, and 

attorney fees: 

2 

3 

$3,544.50 on plaintiffs judicial foreclosure claim, 

pursuant to the terms ofthe Note and Deed of Trust. 

~ f<l,rAA~ 

4 DATEDthis Pt) ..... dayofJafiutlfy,2014. 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

IT IS SO STIPULATED: 

LANE POWELL PC 

By~...----"- '-

Pi:FfeilCh, OSB No. 962880 

Peter D. Hawkes, OSB No. 071986 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

DATED: 2/J<f/Jf 

Submitted by: 

LANE POWELL PC 

Pilar C. French, OSB No. 962880 

Peter D. Hawkes, OSB No. 071986 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

~~ ~.035694 

Attorneys for Defendant Harold F. Beard, Jr. 

DATED:Y to;/ i ~· 

PAGE 5 - STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220.0140/5915666.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 26 of 27
Exhibit 69 

Page 6

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on February 18, 2014, I caused to be served a copy of the foregoing 

[PROPOSED] STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE on the following 

person(s) in the manner indicated below at the following address(es): 

Brett J. Hall 

Hall Law PC 

111 SW Columbia Street, Suite 1010 

Portland, OR 97201 

0 byCM/ECF 

0 by Electronic Mail 

0 by Facsimile Transmission 

~ by First Class Mail 

0 by Hand Delivery 

0 by Overnight Delivery 

Peter D. Hawkes 

PAGE 6 - STIPULATED GENERAL JUDGMENT OF FORECLOSURE 

707220 0140/5915666.1 

LANE POWELL PC 

601 SW SECOND AVENUE, SUITE 2100 

PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3158 

503.778.2100 FAX: 503.778.2200 

Case 3:15-cv-01246-PK Document 37 Filed 07/09/15 Page 27 of 27