Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 04-20-2015

Case Style: Ben Young v. Crescent Management, LLC, Mike Rogers and Justin Tarrant

Case Number: CJ-2015-24

Judge: Louis A. Duel

Court: District Court, Logan County, Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: Shad Withers

Defendant's Attorney: Ropss Dewbre

Description: Logan County, OK - Ben Young sued Crescent Management, LLC, Mike Rogers and Justin Tarrant on fraud theories claiming:

Defendant, Crescent Management LLC is, and all times herein mentioned is a business entity of unknown form,
doing business in Logan County, Oklahoma,
2. Defendant, Mike Roger, Owner of Crescent Management LLC
3. Defendant, Justin Tarrant, managing member, of Crescent Management LLC
4. All Persons Unknown, Claiming Any Legal Or Equitable Right, Title, Estate, or Interest in the Property Described in the Complaint Adverse to Plaintiff’s Title
Or Cloud on Plaintiff’s Title Thereto are used herein pursuant to Oklahoma Civil Procedure §12-1141.4, and (or) other related statues.
5. Plaintiff’s do not know the true names and capacities of the defendant sued herein DOES 1 - 20 ( DOE Defendant”), inclusive, and therefore sues said DOE Defendant by Fictitious names, each of the defendants named herein are believed are believed to, and are alleged to have been acting in concert with, as employee, agent, coconspirator or member of a joint venture of each of the other Defendant and therefore alleged to jointly and severally liable for the claims set forth herein, excerpt as otherwise alleged.
GENERAL ALLEGAT IONS
6. On February 13, 2009, Crescent Management LLC executed contract to the following:
The surface rights only in and to Lots Twenty (20) and
Twenty-one (21), in Block Fifty five (55), in the Oak
Grove Addition to Crescent, Logan County, Oklahoma,
according to the recorded plat thereof
Property Address: 612 West Madison Crescent, Oklahoma 73028
With all the inrovement thereon and appurtenances belonging and warrant the title to the same, except that certain construction mortgage executed in favor of BANCFIRST. A true copy of said real mortgage is being recorded in the Logan County, Clerk Office, Book 2114 at pages 329 — 341 and a copy of the mortgage deed is attached hereto as EXHIBIT A and incorporated hereby by reference.
7. In July 2009, Plaintiffs executed contract which listed the holder of the instrument as Banc First, (US Bank V. Moore 2012 OK ), (Deutsche Bank National Trust v. Brumhaugh, 2012 OK)
8. In addition, Crescent Management LLC annual certification with Secretary of Oklahoma was cancelled during closing of said contract. (VIEW AT&T ADVERTISING, LP V.WINNINGHAM
9. Nevertheless on September 9, 2010, Crescent Management LLC proceeded with foreclosure.
10. Plaintiffs received a notice that foreclosure petition had
been recorded on the Subject Property. The petition was executed on September 9, 2010. However petition was reissued on September 16, 2010 due to defendant’s Counsel error, placed wrong name on petition, Crescent Management LLC foreclosed on Christina Carr as well. She lived next door at 614 W. Madison, Crescent, Oklahoma 73028.
A true copy of petition is attached exhibit “B” Moreover, plaintiffs was not familiar with the entities set forth herein. Specifically, the petition stated that the Primary Note executed by plaintiff was in favor of BancFirst, “Primary Note”, Crescent Management LLC was never a beneficiary of plaintiff’s loan.
11. Additionally Crescent Management LLC was never entitled to receive payments from Plaintiffs pursuant to the Note
12. Crescent Management LLC was not qualified to conduct business in the State of Oklahoma.
13. Thus, Crescent Management LLC did not have legal standing or legal right to execute the note. The petition did not include the a declaration pursuant to Oklahoma Commercial Uniform Code, §12A §section 3-301, and (or) other related statues. A true copy of petition is attached exhibit “C”
14. As plaintiffs were not in default with their payments obligated as they made ( and provided proof of payment) for “ no payment made after July 2010 and thereafter” at issue. Moreover, the petition was wrongful and improper because Crescent Management LLC did not have the legal right to act as holder of the Note.
15. Based on information and belief, there was no assignment of the Note, Crescent Management LLC is not the holder of the NOTE in due course, and Crescent Management LLC was never assigned the note by BancFirst. Accordingly, Crescent Management LLC were never entitled to enforce the Note.
16. Prior to petition plaintiff never received any telephone call or written correspondences from Crescent Management
LLC.
17. September 2010, Mr., filed an entry of appearance on behalf of Plaintiffs, however, Mr., failed to answer the claim.
18. November 2010, Crescent Management LLC filed a motion for default summary.
19. November 2010, Plaintiff filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy to
retain home.
20. September 2011, a court order issued to Crescent Management LLC for accounting ledger.
21. October 2011, plaintiff received accounting ledger # 1
22. In or about 2012, Mr., plaintiffs fired Mr.,.
23. In August 2013, new counsel determined that plaintiffs was not in default based on accounting ledger # 1.
24. In or about October 2013, Crescent Management LLC provided attorney with accounting ledger #2, record will show that results are still the same, plaintiffs not at fault.
25. November 2013, Crescent Management LLC letter to Oklahoma Attorney General will show that plaintiffs were current on June 2010.
26. In December 2013, Oklahoma Attorney General recorded deceptive conduct action against Crescent Management LLC A true copy of letter is attached “EXHIBIT D”
27. In June 2014, plaintiffs (pro se) filed objective to claim with federal court, Crescent Management LLC provided plaintiffs with accounting ledger #3, it states that payment was made on July 2, 2010
28. Plaintiffs online bill pay account was debited an
additional $1000 without approval
29. Crescent Management LLC failed to debit August 2010 monthly payment from plaintiffs online bill pay account
30. Letter dated October 11, 2011, Crescent Management LLC stated that plaintiffs September 2010 payment was insufficient of funds, this is true, because the account was closed.
31. Record will show Crescent Management LLC refused from plaintiffs September 2010 payment via money order.
32. In September 2014, Plaintiffs filed Qualified Written Request to Crescent Management LLC with court.
A true copy of petition is attached “Exhibit E “
33. In December 2014, plaintiffs Chapter 7 was discharged.
34. Based upon information and belief, on February 13, 2009, notwithstanding of the fact that Crescent Management LLC was not under the Note and Crescent Management LLC went ahead with foreclosure petition.
35. Based on information and belief, had plaintiffs had known of the true facts, that Crescent Management LLC, was not a legal entity, plaintiff, among other things, would have maintained Crescent Management LLC as their alleged lender.
36. Based on information and belief the motion of judgment
default is because it took place without anyone presenting the original note, or original and valid assignments of the note to Crescent Management LLC. The failure to do so resulted in invalid motion of judgment summary.
37. Plaintiff are informed and belief that BancFirst NEVER provided a declaration to Crescent Management LLC that plaintiff were in default under the term of the Note and accordingly, the recording of the foreclosure petition and any subsequently documents relating to a non judicial foreclosing were recorded in violation of Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code §12 3-301, and (or)related statues.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENCE
38. Plaintiffs incorporated herein by reference the allegations made in paragraph 1 thru 37, inclusive, as fully set forth herein.
39. At all times relevant herein, the Crescent Management LLC acting as Plaintiff’s lender and loan servicer, had a duty to exercise reasonable care and skill to
maintain proper and accurate loan records and to discharge and fitful the other incidents attendants to the maintenance, accounting and servicing loan records, including, not limited, accurate crediting payments made by Plaintiffs.
40. In taking actions above alleged above, and in failing to take the actions as alleged above Crescent Management LLC breached their duty of care and skill to Plaintiffs in the servicing of Plaintiff’s loan by, among other things, failing to properly accurate credit payments made by plaintiffs toward the loan, preparing and filing false documents, and foreclosing on the subject property without having the legal authority and br proper documentation to do so.
41. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct, plaintiffs has suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, Crescent Management LLC acted with malice, fraud and or oppression and thus, plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
FRAUD
42. Plaintiffs incorporated herein by reference the allegations made in paragraph 1 thru 41, inclusive, as fully set forth herein.
43. Crescent Management LLC had prior knowledge of the failure of a domestic limited liability company . . . to file an annual 10
certificate and pay an annual certificate fee or a registered agent fee to the Secretary of State shall not impair the validity on any contract, deed, mortgage, security interest, lien or act of the domestic limited liability company . . . or prevent the domestic limited liability company . . . from defending any action, suit or proceeding with any court of this state.
44. The foreclosing engaged in a pattern and practices of defrauding Plaintiff in that during the life of mortgage loan, the Crescent Management LLC failed to properly credit payments made and foreclosure on the Subject Property based on Plaintiff’s alleged nonpayment which they were false.
45. Crescent Management LLC had actual knowledge that the Plaintiff’ s account was not accurate but that the foreclosing defendant could use the inaccuracy to foreclosure on the subject property which had substantial equity, to recover its excessive fees, charges and interest. Plaintiff made such payment to and made such payments and provides proof of to the payment based on the improper, inaccurate, and fraudulent representation as to their account. Crescent Management LLC also utilized amount to be inaccurate to determine the amount allegedly due and owing for purpose of foreclosure.
46. Additionally, the Crescent Management LLC concealed material facts to them but not to Plaintiffs regarding payment, notices assignments, transfer, later fees, and charges with the
intent to defraud plaintiff.
47. Crescent Management LLC made the above reference false representation concealment and non- disclosure with knowledge of the misrepresentation, intending to induce Plaintiff’s reliance, which the unsuspecting Plaintiff justifiably relied upon, resulting in damage to their credit standing, costs and loss of their property. Plaintiffs were unaware of the true facts. Had Plaintiff had known of the true facts, Plaintiff, among other things, would have maintained the foreclosing defendant as their lender and trustee, and (and their alleged agent and or would have taken legal action immediately to save their home.
48. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct Plaintiffs have suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, the foreclosing defendant acted with malice and br oppression and, thus, {plaintiff are entitled to award of punitive damage.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
CANCELLATION OF A VOIDABLE CONTRACT UNDER OKLAHOMA
UNIFORM CObThdERCIAL CODE VIOLATES § 18 2055.2.
49. Plaintiff incorporate herein by reference the allegation made in paragraph I. thru 48, inclusive although,
fully set forth herein.
50. Crescent Management LLC conducted business in Oklahoma
when it was not registered with the Secretary of State.
Specifically and or executed an instrument on February
2009 and September 2010 record of foreclosure on Subject
Property.
51. At all relevant times herein, Crescent Management LLC was not registered in Oklahoma during closing and could not prepare or execute the Note. Crescent Management LLC had no legal authority to take such action. Instruments (Deed Of Trust) are contractual in nature.
A contract made by a corporation doing business in Oklahoma while that corporation has failed to file a certification within three years is avoidable at the option of any party. Thus, Crescent Management LLC did not have the legal capacity to enter into a contract with Plaintiffs or anyone else, and Plaintiff have the option of voiding the contract. Therefore, any action that Crescent Management LLC took with regard to the Note and filing of the foreclosure would be ultra vires and void.
52. Moreover, Crescent Management LLC is not a lending institution. It does not originate loans, and never had any true interest in the subject loan or deed of trust thereby does not meet any legal exceptions to the registration requirement for banking institution
53. Plaintiffs hereby expressly request an adjunction to
the effect that the Note and foreclosure is void.
54. Thus Crescent Management LLC failed to follow statutory rules for a valid petition foreclosure under the Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code and it is void.
55. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct Plaintiffs have suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, the foreclosing defendant acted with malice and br oppression and, thus, {plaintiff are entitled to award of punitive damage.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
TO SET ASIDE MOTION OF DEFAULT StThTh4ARY JUDGNT
56. Plaintiff incorporate herein by reference the allegation made in paragraph 1 thru 55, inclusive although, fully set forth herein
57. Crescent Management LLC never had the legal right to foreclosure i.e. power of sale as assignee of the Note and instrument, because the Crescent Management LLC interest was never acknowledge and recorded in violation of Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code §12A section 3-301, and (or) other related Statues, resulting in the non — judicial foreclosure being void a.b initio.
58. Moreover, Crescent Management LLC never had the legal authority to foreclosure if the plaintiff was in default, is void as it improperly assigned and or transferred to the Crescent
Management LLC from BancFirst. Therefore, the instrument could not provide a foreclosure, and the non— judicial foreclosure is void ab initio.
59. Accordingly, Plaintiff hereby request an order of this court The motion of judgment summary was irregular in that void and conducted without any right or privilege by the Crescent Management LLC.
60. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct Plaintiffs have suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, the foreclosing defendant acted with malice and br oppression and, thus, {plaintiff are entitled to award of punitive damage.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
TO VOID ND CANCEL PROMISSORY NOTE
61. Plaintiff incorporate herein by reference the allegation made in paragraph 1 thru 60, inclusive although, fully set forth herein:
62. Although instrument appears valid on its face, it is invalid and no force and effect, for the reason set forth above including inter alia, the fact the instrument which purported secured the Note, which served as the basis for claim to have the right to conduct a non—judicial foreclosure was at all times void due to the wrongful and improper assignment to Crescent Management LLC.
63. Plaintiff are therefore entitled to an order that the instrument Void ab inito and cancelling instrument.
64. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct Plaintiffs have suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, the foreclosing defendant acted with malice and br oppression and, thus, {plaintiff are entitled to award of punitive damage.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
TO VOID ASSIGNMENT OF TRUST OF DEED
IN VIOLATION OF OKLAHOMA UNIFORM COERCIAI CODE §12A-3-301
65. Plaintiff incorporate herein by reference the allegation made in paragraph 1 thru 64, inclusive although, fully set forth herein.
66. As the foreclosure petition must be signed by holder of the instrument, and demonstrating possession of note must comply with Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code §12A-3-301,and (or) other related statues.
67. Because standing must be determined at the inception of the lawsuit, to commence a foreclosure action in Oklahoma, the plaintiff must show that it has the right to enforce the promissory note at the time the foreclosure petition is filed. Absent such showing, the plaintiff lacks standing to bring the lawsuit. To demonstrate standing at the inception of the Lawsuit.
68. Although defendant has a second mortgage with note holder, “[t]he assignment of a mortgage is not the same as an assignment of the note. Therefore ‘[p]roof of ownership of the note carried with it ownership of the mortgage security.
On the other hand, proof of ownership of the mortgage does not carry with it ownership of the note.
69. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct Plaintiffs have suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, the foreclosing defendant acted with malice and br oppression and, thus, {plaintiff are entitled to award of punitive damage.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
SET ASIDE FORECLOSURE
70. Plaintiff incorporate herein by reference the allegation made in paragraph 1 thru 69, inclusive although, fully set forth herein.
71. The Foreclosing Defendant never had the legal authority to foreclose, i.e. the authority to exercise the power of sale as an assignee of the Note and Deed of Trust, because the Foreclosing Defendant’s interest was never acknowledged record in violation of Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code resulting in the non-judicial
foreclosure sale being void ab initio.
72. Moreover the foreclosure Defendant never had legal authority to foreclose because the instrument( Deed of Trust which permitted foreclosure if the borrower was in default, it void as it improper assigned and or transferred to the Foreclosing Defendant from the original lender. Therefore, the Deed of Trust could not provide a basis for a foreclosure; the non— judicial foreclosure is void ab initio.
73. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct Plaintiffs have suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, the foreclosing defendant acted with malice and br oppression and, thus, {plaintiff are entitled to award of punitive damage.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE
74. Plaintiff incorporate herein by reference the allegation made in paragraph 1 thru 73, inclusive although, fully set forth herein.
75. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and therein allege that the origination and funding loan, it was to investor as a mortgage backed security and that none of the Foreclosing Defendant in this action owned this loan or the corresponding note. Moreover, none of the
assigned to them. Accordingly, Crescent Management LLC in this action had no right to declare default, cause foreclosure to be issued or recorded, or foreclosure on Plaintiff’s interest in the Subject Property. Crescent Management LLC was not the note holder or a beneficiary at any time with regard to Plaintiff’s.
76. Plaintiffs further allege information and belief that Crescent Management LLC in this action are beneficiaries or representative of the beneficiary and, if Crescent Management LLC allege otherwise, they do not have the original note to prove that they are in fact the party authorized to conduct the foreclosure.
77. Plaintiff’s further allege on information and belief that the loan was sold or transferred without notifying Plaintiff in writing. Therefore, the loan is void of legal rights to enforce it.
78. Additionally the mortgage servicer violated §46, and (or) other related statues , before it can start a foreclosure, the foreclosing party must mail a notice of
intention to foreclose to the borrower that gives 35 days from the date of the notice to cure the default (by paying past-due amounts) and reinstate the mortgage and requires a mortgages, beneficiary or authorized agent to contact the borrower or person by telephone in order to assess the borrower financial situation and explore options for borrower to avoid foreclosure.
79. Crescent Management LLC never contacted Plaintiffs to
discuss their financial situation. Accordingly, Crescent Management LLC did not fulfill their legal obligation to Plaintiffs.
80. Thus, Crescent Management LLC engaged in a fraudulent foreclosure of the Subject Property in that Crescent Management LLC did not have legal authority to foreclosure and alternative, if they had the legal authority, they failed to comply with ciOklahoma Commercial Uniform Code, 12A section 3-301,and (or) other related Statues.
81. Crescent Management LLC conducted business in Oklahoma
when it was not registered with the Secretary of State.
Specifically and or executed an instrument on February
2009 and September 2010 record of foreclosure on Subject
Property.
82. As a result of the above alleged wrongs, Plaintiffs has suffered general and special damages in amount to be determined at trial.
NINETH CAUSE OF ACTION
BREACH OF CONTRACT
83. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference the allegation made in paragraph 1 thru 82, inclusive although, fully set forth herein.
84. Plaintiff’s original loan agreement set forth dates by which monthly principal and interest payments were due
and when late fees and other charges could be assessed.
85. Alternative, if the original note and deed of trust were properly assigned to defendant, defendant breached the note and deed of trust. That plaintiff signed in July 2009. The terms of the note required payments made by plaintiff to be applied properly to the note.
86. Crescent Management LLC breached the note and deed of trust by failing to apply the payments by Plaintiff’s in August and September 2010 to plaintiff
loan, the result of which led to the Crescent Management LLC eventually foreclosing on the Subject Property
87. As a proximately result of defendant breaches, plaintiff have suffered commentary damages in an amount to proven at trial.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
BREACH OF THE IMPLIED CONVENTANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
88. Plaintiffs incorporated herein by reference the allegations made in paragraph 1 thru 87, inclusive, as fully set forth herein.
89. Every contract imposes upon each party a duty of good faith and fair dealing in it performances and its enforcement. This implied covenant of good faith and
fair dealing requires that no party will do anything that will have the effect of impairing, destroying, or injuring the rights of the other party will do anything that will have the affect of impairing, destroying or injuring the rights of the other party to receive the benefits of their agreement. The covenant.
90. Alternative, if the note and deed of trust validly and properly assigned to the Crescent Management LLC did not act in good faith and did not deal fairly with plaintiff in connection with the note an deed of trust when they refused to properly apply the August and September 2010 payments to their loan and thereafter foreclosed on the Subject Property even though plaintiff provided proof of payment for the allegedly skipped months and thereafter refused to resolve the mistake with plaintiffs in equitable fashion.
91. Crescent Management LLC enjoyed substile discretely power affecting the rights of plaintiff during the events in this complaint. They were required to exercise such power in good faith.
92. Crescent Management LLC engaged in such conduct to drive plaintiff into foreclosure so that they could acquire the Subject Property with its large equity at a bargain basement price. These actions were in bad faith breach of the contract between plaintiff and the Crescent Management LLC which show that they had no
intention performing the contract, consisting of the original note and deed of trusting good faith.
93. Crescent Management LLC conducted business in Oklahoma
when it was not registered with the Secretary of State.
Specifically and or executed an instrument on February
2009 and September 2010 record of foreclosure on Subject
Property.
94. As a result of the foreclosing defendant breaches of those covenant, plaintiff have suffered general and special damages in amount to be determine at trial.
ELEVENTHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
95. Plaintiffs incorporated herein by reference the allegations made in paragraph 1 thru 94, inclusive, as fully set forth herein.
96. By Crescent Management LLC wrongful acts and omissions, has been unjustly enriched at the expense of plaintiffs and thus plaintiffs have unjustly deprived.
97. By reason of the foregoing, plaintiff seek restitution from Crescent Management LLC, and an order of this court disgorging all profits, benefits, and other compensation obtained by the defendant from his wrongful conduct.
98. Crescent Management LLC conducted business in Oklahoma when it was not registered with the Secretary of State.
Specifically and or executed an instrument on February
2009 and September 2010 record of foreclosure on Subject
Property.
99. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct plaintiffs have suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, Crescent Management LLC acted with malice and br oppression and, thus, {plaintiff are entitled to award of punitive damage.
TWELVETH CAUSE OF ACTION
VIOLATION OF OKLAHOMA CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT
§ 15, Section 753
100. Plaintiffs incorporated herein by reference the allegations made in paragraph 1 thru 99, inclusive, as fully set forth herein.
101. Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act; amending §15 Sections 753, and (or) other related statues, prohibit false or misleading representation, knowingly or with reason to know, as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification
of the subject of a consumer transaction.
102. As more fully described above, Crescent Management LLC acts and practices are likely to deceive, constitutes a fraudulent business act or practice. This conduct is ongoing and continues to date.
(a) Failing to provide adequate monthly statements to
(b) Plaintiffs regarding the status of their account, payments owed, and or basis for fees assessed.
(c) Instituting improper or premature foreclosure
(d) proceedings to generate unwarranted fees
(f) Assessing improper or excessive late fees
(g) Improperly characterizing plaintiff’s account as being in default or delinquent status to generate unwarranted fees
(h) Misapplying or failing to apply plaintiff’s payments:
(i) Seeking to collect, and collecting, various improper fees, costs, and charges that are either not legally due under the mortgage contract or Oklahoma law, or that are in excess of amount legally due
(j) Mishandling borrower’s mortgage payment and failing to timely or properly credit payment received, resulting in late charges, delinquencies or default
(j) Treating plaintiff as in default on their loan even though plaintiffs have tendered timely payments or have otherwise complied with mortgage requirement of Oklahoma law
(k) Failing to disclose the fees, costs and charges
allowable the mortgage contract
(1) Ignoring grace periods
(m) Executing and recording false and misleading documents: and
(1) Acting as benefices and trustee without the legal
authority to do so.
103. The foregoing acts and practices have caused substantial harm to Oklahoma consumers.
104. As a direct and proximate cause of the unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent acts and practices of the
Crescent Management LLC, Plaintiffs and Oklahoma consumers have suffered and will continue to suffer damages in the
form of unfair and unwarranted fees and other improper fees.
105. Crescent Management LLC fail to act in good faith as they take fees for services but do not harm them competently and in compliance with applicable law.
106. Moreover, Crescent Management LLC engages in a uniform pattern and practices of unfair and overly — aggressive that result in the assessment of unwarranted and unfair fees against plaintiff, premature default often resulting unfair and illegally foreclosure proceedings. The scheme implemented by the Crescent Management LLC is designed to defraud Oklahoma consumers and enrichment Crescent Management LLC by reason of the foregoing, Crescent Management LLC have been unjustly enriched and should be required to
disgorge their illicit profits and make recitation to plaintiff and other Oklahoma consumers who have been harmed and or be enjoined from continuing in such practices pursuant to Oklahoma . Additionally, plaintiff is therefore entitled to injunctive relief and attorney fees as available under Oklahoma Consumer Protection Act; amending §15, Sections 753, and (or) other related statues.
107. As a result of the Crescent Management LLC fraudulent conduct plaintiffs have suffered compensatory, general and special damages in an amount of proof. Additionally, the defendant acted with malice and br oppression
and, thus, {plaintiff are entitled to award of punitive damage.
THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
SLANDER OF TITLE
108. Plaintiffs incorporated herein by reference the allegations made in paragraph 1 thru 107, inclusive, as fully set forth herein.
109. Crescent Management LLC wrongfully and without privilege, has published matters or caused matter to be published.
110. By doing the acts described above the Crescent Management LLC have slandered against plaintiffs.
111. Foreclosing defendant purported but falsely acted as either the trustee or agent of the beneficiary of the
deed of Trust or agent of BanFirst, wrongfully and without privilege caused a foreclosure to be record against the Subject Property.
112. Pursuant to among other, Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code §12 3-
301,and (or) other related Statues, only the beneficiary of deed of trust or beneficiary assignee or agent or its assignee may cause to be recorded against real either an notice of default.
113. The conduct of the Defendant caused plaintiff to
suffer general and special damages in amount to be proven at trial.
114. Crescent Management LLC wrongfully an without privilege has published matters or caused matters to be published that they are the current owners of the subject property which is untrue and disparaging to plaintiff interest in the subject property.
115. In that conduct and acts of the Crescent Management LLC violated, among others §15, Sections 753, and (or)related sections.
116. Crescent Management LLC conducted business in Oklahoma
when it was not registered with the Secretary of State.
Specifically and or executed an instrument on February
2009 and September 2010 record of foreclosure on Subject
Property.
117. By doing the acts above the foreclosing defendant have slander plaintiff title to the subject property.
FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
ALL PERSON UNKNOWN, CLAIMING ANY LEGAL OR EQUITABLE RIGHT
TITLE, ESTATE, LEIN, OR INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE
COMPLAINT ADVESRSE TO PLAINTIFF’ S OR ANY CLOUD ON PLAINTIFF’
TITLE THERETO;
118. Plaintiffs incorporated herein by reference the allegations made in paragraph 1 thru 117, inclusive, as fully set forth herein.
119. Plaintiffs are the equitable owners of the Subject
Property which has the following legal description:
The surface rights only in and to Lots Twenty (20) and
Twenty-one (21), in Block Fifty five (55), in the Oak
Grove Addition to Crescent, Logan County, Oklahoma,
according to the recorded plat thereof
Property Address: 612 West Madison Crescent, Oklahoma 73028
With all the improvement thereon and appurtenances belonging and warrant the title to the same, except that certain construction mortgage executed in favor of BANCFIRST. A true copy of said real mortgage is being recorded in the Logan County, Clerk Office, Book 2114 at pages 329 — 341.
120. Plaintiff seek to quiet title of Crescent Management
LLC, ALL PERSON UNKNOWN, CLAIMING ANY LEGAL OR
EQUITABLE RIGHT TITLE, ESTATE, LEIN, OR INTEREST IN THE
PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THE COMPLAINT ADVESRSE TO
PLAINTIFF’S OR ANY CLOUD ON PLAINTIFF’ TITLE THERETO;
AND DOES 1 THROUGH 20
Collectively referred to herein as the ( “Title Defendant”) As the Title Defendant hold themselves out as entitled to fee simple ownership of the Subject Property by through construction loan. In fact, Crescent Management LLC had no right to title or
interest in the Subject Property and no right to entertain any right of ownership including the right to foreclose, and file a motion for judgment summary. Nevertheless, Crescent Management LLC proceeded with a petition of non-judicial foreclosure through BancFirst as Primary Noteholder, illegally and with unclean hands. Plaintiffs are willing to tender the amount received subject to equitable adjustment for the damages caused to the plaintiffs by the Title Defendant’s activities.
121. In July 2009, Plaintiff executed the contract which listed BancFirst as the “Primary Noteholder”. Later Crescent Management LLC foreclosed on the Subject Property. At that time Crescent Management IJIJC signed the foreclosure petition. As the petition must be signed by holder of the note, either original or substitute must comply with Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code, §12 3-301, and (or) other related Statues, the foreclosure petition is void because Crescent
Management LLC was not the holder of the note at time that it
signed the foreclosure petition and allegedly comply with §12 3-
301. Thus, BancFirst failed to follow statutory rules for A valid foreclosure under Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code and it is therefore, void.
122. Additionally, motion for judgment summary should be set aside because the requirements of Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code were not complied by Crescent Management LLC.
123. Plaintiffs seek to quiet title as February 13, 2009. Plaintiffs Seek judicial declaration that the title to the Subject Property is vested in Plaintiff alone and that the Title Defendants and each one of them have no interest estate right, title or estate in the subject property and that Crescent Management LLC, their agents and assigns be forever enjoined from asserting any estate, right title or interest in the Subject Property subject to Plaintiff’s Rights.


Docket
Date Code Description Count Party Amount
02-04-2015 TEXT

PETITION

Document Available (#1028030900)

02-04-2015 FRAUD

FRAUD

02-04-2015 DMFE

DISPUTE MEDIATION FEE
$ 2.00
02-04-2015 PFE1

PETITION
$ 163.00
02-04-2015 PFE7

LAW LIBRARY FEE
$ 6.00
02-04-2015 OCISR

Oklahoma Court Information System Revolving Fund
$ 25.00
02-04-2015 CCADMIN02

Court Clerk Administrative Fee on $2 Collections
$ 0.20
02-04-2015 OCJC

Oklahoma Council on Judicial Complaints Revolving Fund
$ 2.00
02-04-2015 OCASA

Oklahoma Court Appointed Special Advocates
$ 5.00
02-04-2015 CCADMIN04

Court Clerk Administrative Fee on Collections
$ 0.50
02-04-2015 LTF

Lengthy Trial Fund
$ 10.00
02-04-2015 TEXT

OCIS has automatically assigned Judge Duel, Louis A to this case.

02-04-2015 ACCOUNT

Receipt # 2015-185186 on 02/04/2015. CHANGE 6.30
Payor:Ben L. Young Total Amount Paid: $213.70.
Line Items:
CJ-2015-24: $213.70 on AC98 OverPayments for Young, Ben L..
Young, Ben L.
02-05-2015 SMF

SUMMONS ISSUED TO LOGAN COUNTY SHERIFF FOR SERVICE ON CRESCENT MANAGEMENT, LLC, ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS DEWBRE & DEWBRE, PC 2220 SHADOWLAKE DR., OKC, OK 73159

Document Available (#1028031074)
Young, Ben L. $ 5.00
02-05-2015 SMIS

SUMMONS ISSUED - SHERIFF
Young, Ben L. $ 50.00
02-05-2015 ACCOUNT

Receipt # 2015-185307 on 02/05/2015. 5.0 change
Payor:Ben L. Young Total Amount Paid: $55.00.
Line Items:
CJ-2015-24: $5.00 on AC01 Clerk Fees for Young, Ben L..
CJ-2015-24: $50.00 on AC08 Sheriff Fees for Young, Ben L..
Young, Ben L.
02-06-2015 ACCOUNT

Receipt # 2015-185410 on 02/06/2015.
Payor: Total Amount Paid: $0.00.
Line Items:
CJ-2015-24: $-50.00 on Transfer from AC08 Sheriff Fees for Young, Ben L..
CJ-2015-24: $50.00 on Transfer to AC37 Foreign Service Fees for Young, Ben L..
Young, Ben L.
02-06-2015 DISBURSED

Voucher# 13843 printed to Oklahoma County Sheriff, which includes $ 50.00 from this case for AC37 - Foreign Service Fees. Total amount of voucher: $ 50.00.
Young, Ben L.
02-10-2015 ACCOUNT

Receipt # 2015-185637 on 02/10/2015.
Payor: Total Amount Paid: $0.00.
Line Items:
CJ-2015-24: $163.00 on Transfer to AC01 Clerk Fees.
CJ-2015-24: $6.00 on Transfer to AC23 Law Library Fee.
CJ-2015-24: $0.70 on Transfer to AC31 Court Clerk Revolving Fund.
CJ-2015-24: $5.00 on Transfer to AC58 Oklahoma Court Appointed Special Advocates.
CJ-2015-24: $2.00 on Transfer to AC59 Oklahoma Council on Judicial Complaints Revolving Fund.
CJ-2015-24: $2.00 on Transfer to AC64 Dispute Mediation Fees.
CJ-2015-24: $25.00 on Transfer to AC79 OCIS Revolving Fund.
CJ-2015-24: $10.00 on Transfer to AC81 Lengthy Trial Fund.
CJ-2015-24: $-213.70 on Transfer from AC98 OverPayments for Young, Ben L..

02-10-2015 DISBURSED

Voucher # 13843 payable to Oklahoma County Sheriff, which includes $ 50.00 from this case, cancelled by treasurer. Voucher originally issued on 02/06/2015.

02-10-2015 DISBURSED

Voucher# 13865 printed to Clevaeland County Sheriff, which includes $ 50.00 from this case for AC37 - Foreign Service Fees. Total amount of voucher: $ 50.00.
Young, Ben L.
02-18-2015 SMS

SUMMONS RETURNED - SERVED CRESCENT MANAGEMENT LLC BY LEAVING A COPY IWTH DEWBRE AND DEWBRE WITH LYNDA KENDRICK/EMPLOYEE ON 2/11/15

Document Available (#1027546436)
Young, Ben L.
03-02-2015 MOSJ

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Document Available (#1027547906)
Young, Ben L. $ 50.00
03-02-2015 MOD

Motion To Dismiss - FAXED COPY

Document Available (#1027547917)
Crescent Management, LLC
03-02-2015 ACCOUNT

Receipt # 2015-186485 on 03/02/2015.
Payor:Ben L. Young Total Amount Paid: $50.00.
Line Items:
CJ-2015-24: $50.00 on AC01 Clerk Fees for Young, Ben L..
Young, Ben L.
03-06-2015 AFD

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

Document Available (#1027548604)
Young, Ben L.
03-06-2015 MODJ

MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

Document Available (#1027548605)
Young, Ben L.
03-12-2015 RESP

DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Document Available (#1029063510)
Crescent Management, LLC
03-12-2015 MOD

Motion To Dismiss

Document Available (#1029063587)
Crescent Management, LLC
03-16-2015 RESP

DEFENDANT'S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND ALTERNATIVE MOTIO FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Document Available (#1029063583)
Crescent Management, LLC
03-16-2015 TEXT

2ND QUALIFIED WRITTEN REQUEST TO CRESCENT MANAGEMENT LLC FROM BEN AND MARSHA YOUNG - FAXED COPY

Document Available (#1029063579)
Young, Ben L.
03-27-2015 MOCON

Motion For Continuance - FAXED COPY

Document Available (#1029061287)
Young, Ben L.
03-27-2015 CM

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

Document Available (#1029061310)
Crescent Management, LLC
03-27-2015 MO

SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION TO DISMISS - FAXED COPY

Document Available (#1029062771)
Young, Ben L.
04-03-2015 EAA

ENTRY OF APPEARANCE BY COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT / CERTIFICATE OF DELIVERY

Document Available (#1029062089)
Young, Ben L.
04-03-2015 CTFREE

JUDGE DUEL- CASE COMES ON FOR PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE AND DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS. THE PLAINTIFF APPEARS BY SHAD WITHERS. THE DEFENDANT APPEARS BY ROSS DEWBRE. AFTER ARGUMENT, THE COURT SUSTAINS THE DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS.

04-23-2015 O

Order

Document Available (#1029376014)
Crescent Management, LLC

Outcome: Motion to dismiss sustained.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: