1 1 2 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 3 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x 5 6 In Re: SILVIA NUER 7 Debtor, 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x 9 10 11 DEPOSITION OF SCOTT WALTER 12 New York, New York 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2 1 2 3 4 March 16, 2010 5 11:10 a.m. 6 7 Deposition of SCOTT WALTER, held 8 at the offices of United States Trustee's 9 Office, 33 Whitehall Street, before Dale 10 W. Tice, RPR, a Notary Public of the State 11 of New York. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 1 2 APPEARANCES: 3 GARDERE WYNNE SEWELL LLP 4 Attorneys for the witness 1000 Louisiana 5 Suite 3400 Houston, Texas 77002 6 BY: MICHAEL P. CASH, ESQ. 7 8 TEITELBAUM & BASKIN, LLP 9 Attorneys for Chase 3 Barker Avenue 10 Third Floor White Plains, New York 10601 11 BY: JAY TEITELBAUM, ESQ. 12 13 UNITED STATES TRUSTEES OFFICE 14 Attorneys for U.S. Trustee 33 Whitehall 15 New York, New York 10004 16 BY: GREG ZIPES, ESQ. 17 LINDA M. TIRELLI, ESQ. 18 Attorney for Debtor 202 Mamaroneck Avenue 19 White Plains, New York 10601 20 ALSO PRESENT: 21 Audrey Willams 22 23 24 25 4 1 2 STIPULATIONS 3 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND 4 AGREED, by and among the attorneys for the 5 respective parties hereto, that the 6 filing, sealing, and certification of the 7 within deposition shall be and the same 8 are hereby waived; 9 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 10 AGREED that all objections, except as to 11 form of the question, shall be reserved to 12 the time of the trial; 13 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 14 AGREED that the within deposition may be 15 signed before any Notary Public with the 16 same force and effect as if signed and 17 sworn to before the Court. 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 1 2 SCOTT WALTER, 3 the Witness herein, having first 4 been duly sworn by the Notary Public, was 5 examined and testified as follows. 6 MR. CASH: Before we start, I'd 7 like to put something on the record. 8 We are here voluntarily. We 9 don't believe the witness has been 10 properly served. We don't believe 11 service was properly effected. 12 We are here, though, as an 13 accommodation because we want to have 14 this case move forward to which we are 15 a nonparty. 16 Mr. Walter is here voluntarily 17 and we are trying to cooperate. 18 MR. ZIPES: I'm Greg Zipes from 19 the U.S. Trustee's office. We are 20 actually going to serve you with a 21 subpoena right now. This is for an 22 appearance on Friday. If you would 23 like we can come back on Friday. 24 MR. CASH: Here we are 25 voluntarily. We are here for the 6 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 case, but we can talk about that 3 later. 4 MR. ZIPES: I have a statement 5 for the record. I wasn't quite 6 expecting it to turn this early. The 7 U.S. Trustee duly served a subpoena on 8 Scott Walters through Cheryl Newman. 9 That took place on February 24th, 10 2010. The record should reflect that 11 the e-mail was not returned from Ms. 12 Newman, that there was no comment 13 about service of the subpoena not 14 being appropriate until yesterday 15 afternoon when in response to a phone 16 call by me, Greg Zipes, to Mr. Cash, 17 an e-mail actually after the time 18 specified on the subpoena for LPS to 19 provide certain documents, those 20 documents were not responded to. That 21 document request was not responded 22 to. 23 Mr. Cash, for the first time, 24 stated that the subpoena somehow was 25 not valid. So we are prepared to put 7 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 this before the Court and -- 3 MR. CASH: Fair enough. 4 MR. ZIPES: -- we will deal with 5 it. 6 MR. CASH: Okay. Let's roll. 7 Oh, I have brought the default 8 services agreement between Washington 9 Mutual and Fidelity, National 10 Foreclosure Bankruptcy Solutions, May 11 17, 2004. This is the only one in 12 effect. There is no agreement between 13 Chase and Fidelity. 14 I am willing to produce this if 15 we can get a confidentiality agreement 16 before I do so. If not, I will just 17 bring it back to Texas with me. It's 18 up to you. 19 MR. ZIPES: The U.S. Trustee 20 served the subpoena requesting this 21 document. It was requested as of 22 yesterday. That deadline was not 23 complied with by LPS. We are hearing 24 today that some sort of 25 confidentiality agreement is 8 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 necessary. Obviously my office would 3 have cooperated if we knew it was an 4 issue. But we didn't get that 5 information until yesterday afternoon. 6 So we may have to come back to 7 do a deposition with respect to that 8 document. And the Court may have to 9 ultimately decide that decision. 10 MR. CASH: We are happy for you 11 to come to Florida to take his 12 deposition. 13 MR. TEITELBAUM: Jay Teitelbaum, 14 counsel for Chase. 15 Since Mr. Cash and Mr. Walter 16 are here, first suggestion is that we 17 proceed as best we can with the 18 deposition with whatever parties 19 reserving whatever rights they need to 20 to, you know, object down the road. 21 With respect to this default 22 services agreement, which I haven't 23 seen, perhaps Mr. Cash can make a 24 statement as to what you believe would 25 be an appropriate confidentiality 9 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 agreement, and maybe we can reach 3 agreement so we can proceed with the 4 deposition based on that. And if not, 5 not. I have no idea. 6 MR. ZIPES: There are rules of 7 evidence. Obviously, if a party wants 8 to assert confidential -- withholding 9 a document on the basis of 10 confidentiality, or some other reason, 11 there are procedures, and I'm not 12 necessarily accepting the 13 appropriateness of this procedure. 14 MR. TEITELBAUM: Let me make an 15 suggestion, though, is that certainly 16 any confidentiality, and I agree with 17 you, a party would have to seek 18 protective order, et cetera, but what 19 parties can do is agree for the 20 purposes of this deposition that it 21 would be confidential, subject to the 22 ability of either party to move to 23 compel the document to be produced 24 more broadly, or to seek a protective 25 order. But absent that protective 10 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 order, at least see what's in it and 3 proceed with the depo. I don't have a 4 dog in this fight, but I'm here, it's 5 costing us all money. I'm trying to 6 get it to move forward. 7 MR. CASH: Here is where we are: 8 We didn't have to be here because we 9 weren't properly served. But we came 10 anyway. I didn't have to bring the 11 document because it wasn't properly 12 served, but I brought it anyway. 13 All I need is an agreement that 14 it can be used for this deposition and 15 then it will be returned. It cannot 16 be used for any other purpose. No 17 copies of it can leave here. 18 And then if down the road we 19 want to have a fight about whether you 20 all can get and use it again, so be 21 it. I brought it as an accommodation 22 because you wanted to ask questions on 23 it. So I brought it. 24 MR. ZIPES: We will take up with 25 the court because we're being 11 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 sandbagged at the time of the 3 deposition with the document. You had 4 a subpoena. You chose to ignore the 5 subpoena. And that is your decision. 6 And we will put it before the Court. 7 MS. TIRELLI: Linda Tirelli, 8 representing the debtor. 9 Has this document been disclosed 10 in any other case? 11 MR. CASH: No, not where it's 12 not been subject to confidentiality 13 and a protective order. 14 MS. TIRELLI: Has this ever been 15 disclosed where it's public record? 16 MR. ZIPES: Are you saying that 17 agreement of this kind -- 18 MR. CASH: Stop, both of you. 19 What I'm telling you I've got 20 here, if you want to use it, subject 21 to the conditions I put on it for this 22 deposition, it's here. 23 If not, ask your questions. 24 MR. TEITELBAUM: Would everybody 25 agree if Mr. Zipes wants to do it in 12 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 camera review to the Court? 3 MR. CASH: But for today what 4 I'm saying is if you want to have it 5 in your hands, read it, use it, look 6 at, ask questions about it, so be it. 7 MR. ZIPES: I would also note, 8 for the record, that I believe Chase 9 can also produce this document. 10 Since we didn't have notice that 11 this was even an issue until yesterday 12 afternoon, we might have been able to 13 get this document some other way. 14 But since the subpoena was not 15 complied with, and first I heard that 16 the document was not going to be 17 produced was yesterday after the time 18 and date that the document was 19 supposed -- excuse me. 20 MR. CASH: Let's just ask 21 questions. We're done. 22 MR. ZIPES: Since it wasn't 23 produced, we will take it up with the 24 court. 25 MR. CASH: I withdraw the offer. 13 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 MR. ZIPES: Well, we are done 3 today. We are done. We will put it 4 before the Court. 5 MR. CASH: You're done? You're 6 done? We will move for sanctions 7 because we flew our butts all the way 8 up here, and you knew you were going 9 to do this, and -- are you kidding me? 10 If you flew us both up here 11 knowing today that you weren't -- we 12 are not going to be here on the 19th. 13 I'm putting that on the record. Two 14 days notice for a deposition. 15 MR. ZIPES: There is a discovery 16 conference tomorrow and we are going 17 put this before the judge tomorrow. 18 MR. CASH: We're not even a 19 party. This court doesn't have 20 jurisdiction over us. 21 MR. ZIPES: We will see. 22 MR. CASH: Okay. So we are for 23 a depo. If everybody doesn't want to 24 take it besides the U.S. Trustee -- if 25 any of the other parties want to ask 14 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 questions, but we ain't coming back. 3 Not without an order from a court that 4 has jurisdiction over us. 5 MR. ZIPES: You will get your 6 order. And we will be back. 7 MS. TIRELLI: I don't think it's 8 appropriate to go forward under these 9 circumstances. 10 MR. CASH: You could have picked 11 up the phone and called me before I 12 got on an airplane this morning if you 13 knew you weren't going to be going 14 forward with the deposition. 15 I sent you a letter that said I 16 was going to object and I sent you a 17 letter telling you the subpoena was 18 invalid. So you knew yesterday. You 19 knew yesterday what the parameters 20 were, that we are coming up here. He 21 knew we were both coming from far away 22 today, that we were flying, to give a 23 deposition. 24 In fact, we talked yesterday, 25 counsel, at length, about you were 15 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 going to ask as many questions as you 3 could, do as much as you could. 4 Let's go forward because, as I 5 said, if we just want to stip the 6 confidentiality, and you said no. And 7 now we come all the way up to New York 8 today from Houston, and from 9 Minnesota, and you tell us after a 10 five-minute little diatribe on the 11 record that you are not going to 12 proceed with the deposition. That is 13 extreme bad faith. 14 MR. ZIPES: Mr. Cash, don't 15 point your finger at me. That is 16 number one. 17 Mr. Cash, let's not talk about 18 bad faith. Let's talk about ignoring 19 a subpoena. 20 MR. CASH: It's not a valid 21 subpoena. 22 MR. ZIPES: You ignored the 23 subpoena. 24 MR. CASH: Have you read Rule 25 45? 16 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 MR. ZIPES: Mr. Cash, you 3 weren't involved when the subpoena was 4 served. The subpoena was served. You 5 didn't raise it. That is bad faith. 6 Not raising your objection until the 7 day before a subpoena. 8 MR. CASH: I don't have to 9 object to your defective subpoena 10 before the deposition. Rule 45 lays 11 forth exactly -- 12 MR. ZIPES: We served a subpoena 13 today, as well, and we don't waive our 14 right to state that the subpoena is 15 valid. 16 MR. CASH: Object on the record. 17 I'm objecting to this subpoena. And 18 I'm objecting to the document 19 production. Read the rules, 20 counselor. Move to compel. 21 What do you want to do? Do you 22 want to talk, or do you want to walk? 23 MR. ZIPES: We will put it 24 before the Court. I will ask 25 questions and we will put it before 17 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 the Court. Mr. Cash, there will be an 3 order entered. 4 MR. CASH: Really? Do you know 5 what the Court is going to do? Nice. 6 MR. ZIPES: It's a sign of a 7 weak case. You definitely don't -- 8 MR. CASH: We are not a party. 9 Do you understand? 10 MR. ZIPES: Let's get into this. 11 MR. CASH: We are here to 12 accommodate your case. 13 BY MR. ZIPES: 14 Q Mr. Walter, good afternoon to 15 you. My name is Greg Zipes. I'm with the 16 United States Office of Trustee. We are 17 here a component of the Department of 18 Justice charged with, among other things, 19 the orderly administration of Chapter 7/11 20 cases. 21 We have this deposition 22 scheduled in order to question LPS 23 regarding certain facts that occurred in 24 the case of In re: Newer 1416. 25 Mr. Scott Walter, I will ask you 18 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 this: Are you aware that a subpoena was 3 issued requiring your appearance today? 4 MR. CASH: Object to the form of 5 the question. Assumes facts not in 6 evidence. 7 Q And you can answer the question. 8 A I understand that there was a 9 deposition today. 10 Q Okay. Are you aware that a 11 subpoena was issued? 12 A I'm aware that I had a 13 deposition today. 14 Q Are you aware that a subpoena 15 was issued? 16 MR. CASH: Objection. Asked and 17 answered. You don't have to answer it 18 again. 19 Q Are you answering the question? 20 Was there something about the question 21 that you didn't understand? 22 A No. I understood the question. 23 Q Do you know what a subpoena is? 24 A I do. 25 Q Are you aware that a subpoena 19 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 was issued requiring your appearance 3 today? 4 MR. CASH: Objection. Object to 5 the form of the question. Assumes 6 facts not in evidence. 7 Q I'm asking him if he knows. 8 MR. CASH: No. You are asking 9 if that subpoena -- I will tell you, 10 if you let me. You said that a 11 subpoena was issued requiring his 12 attendance. The subpoena does not 13 require his attendance. The required 14 HPI does not comply with the terms of 15 Rule 45. So you are trying to 16 validate your invalid subpoena. 17 BY MR. ZIPES 18 Q Okay. Are you aware that a 19 subpoena was issued by the U.S. Trustee's 20 Office in this case in connection with LPS 21 Default Services, Inc.? 22 A I don't have personal 23 recollection of a subpoena. 24 Q You have never seen a subpoena? 25 A I have seen a subpoena. 20 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q Was that subpoena from the U.S. 3 Trustee's Office the LPS Default 4 Solutions, Inc.? 5 A I don't believe that I have seen 6 a subpoena from you. I merely meant -- I 7 have seen a subpoena in my life. 8 Q Okay. Did you review any 9 documents prior to today's deposition? 10 A Yes. 11 Q What documents did you review? 12 A An assignment of mortgage. 13 MR. ZIPES: All right. I'm 14 going to mark as UST/LPS 1 an 15 assignment of mortgage dated November 16 1, 2008. 17 (UST/LPS Exhibit 1 marked for 18 identification.) 19 BY MR. ZIPES 20 Q Do you recognize this document 21 that I placed before you? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And what is that document? 24 A It is an assignment of mortgage. 25 Q Is that the assignment of 21 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 mortgage that you were referring to 3 before? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Can you just recite at the top 6 of that what document you are looking at 7 so the record is clear? 8 A The document is called 9 "assignment of mortgage." 10 Q And that is your signature on 11 it? 12 A It is. 13 Q Or a copy of your signature, I 14 should say. You signed an original of 15 this, correct? 16 A Correct. 17 Q Let me ask you, below your 18 signature is handwritten "Scott Walter 19 attorney in fact." 20 Do you see that? 21 A I do. 22 Q Is that your handwriting? 23 A No. 24 Q Let me refer you above the 25 signature line which has "In witness 22 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 whereof, the Assignor has caused these 3 presents sign to be signed by its duly 4 authorized officer of this 1st day of 5 November, 2008." 6 Do you see that? 7 A I do. 8 Q Is that your handwriting? 9 A No. 10 Q Do you know whose handwriting 11 that is? 12 A No. 13 Q And the same goes for your name 14 underneath? 15 A I'm sorry. You asked me two 16 questions before. It's not my 17 handwriting. I don't know who wrote it. 18 Q I was asking about 1, November, 19 2008. You testified that wasn't your 20 handwriting, correct? 21 A It is not my handwriting. 22 Q Just to be clear, the "Scott 23 Walter" and the "Scott Walter attorney in 24 fact" as well? 25 A Correct. 23 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q Do you recall signing this 3 document? 4 A I don't independently recall 5 signing this particular document. 6 However, that is my signature. 7 Q Do you have any records that 8 would indicate when this document was 9 signed? 10 A November 1, 2008. 11 Q Do you have any other records 12 that would indicate when this document was 13 signed by you? 14 A Yes. 15 Q What are those other documents? 16 A Within the monitoring platform 17 that monitors the activities of attorneys, 18 that system of record would have been 19 memorialized with this date. 20 Q Okay. Let me get back to 21 your -- I will have further questions 22 about this. But let me get back to your 23 background. 24 Did you review any other 25 documents prior to today's deposition? 24 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A No. 3 Q Did you have any discussions 4 with anyone regarding today's deposition? 5 A No. My attorney. 6 Q Outside of counsel. And the 7 answer is? 8 A No. 9 Q When did you review this 10 document, the assignment? 11 A Well, obviously I reviewed it on 12 November 1, 2008. But for deposition I 13 reviewed it last week. I can't recall 14 which day. 15 Q Mr. Walter, where do you reside? 16 A I reside in St. Paul, Minnesota. 17 Q Let me quickly take you through 18 your level of schooling. What is your 19 latest degree? 20 A I have a Bachelor of Arts in 21 literature. 22 Q When did you receive that from 23 and from where? 24 A 2003. Chapman University. 25 Q Did you go into college straight 25 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 out of high school? 3 A I did. 4 Q Have you had any post-college 5 education of any kind? 6 A I'm not sure what you are asking 7 me. 8 Q Fair enough. 9 Any post-graduate degrees that 10 you studied for? 11 A No. 12 Q Do you hold any professional 13 licenses? 14 A No. 15 Q Okay. My intention is not to go 16 through your entire work history. But 17 tell me broadly how many places have you 18 worked before your current place of 19 employment? 20 A Two. 21 Q Then I will take it through 22 because it's not too many. 23 Tell me where you first worked? 24 A I worked at a movie theater. 25 Q And that was 2003 to what? 26 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A Prior to that. 3 Q Tell me when you started and 4 when you ended? 5 A 1994 to 1999. 6 Q Let me move on. After you 7 graduated, I was more focused on. 8 So where have you worked after 9 you graduated? 10 A Fidelity National Financial, 11 which is now Lender Processing Services. 12 Q Okay. So when I say "LPS" I'm 13 referring to Lender Processing Services, 14 okay? 15 A Okay. 16 Q When did Fidelity turn into LPS 17 do you know? 18 A I can't recall the exact day. 19 Q Were you there when that 20 happened? 21 A I was. 22 Q Can you give me an approximate 23 timeframe of when that happened, two 24 years? 25 A Year and a half, two years ago, 27 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 near and a half. 3 Q Are you employed by anybody 4 other than LPS? 5 A No. 6 Q Okay. So tell me briefly, let's 7 start with Fidelity. When did you 8 start -- it's the same company, though, 9 isn't it, one is Sun One, one is success 10 of in interest to the other? 11 A Correct. 12 Q So tell me when you started with 13 Fidelity? 14 A December 2003. 15 Q What was your initial job 16 function there? 17 A I was an operations specialist. 18 Q What were your job functions as 19 an operations specialist? 20 A I supported a particular 21 processing within the system of record 22 that our technology company provides. I'm 23 done. 24 Q Tell me what Fidelity and LPS 25 generally do? 28 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A LPS provides technology 3 solutions to help the mortgage industry 4 track and monitor certain activities. 5 Q Does it use a computer system to 6 do that? 7 A It does. 8 Q And before when you mentioned 9 that there might be a separate record of 10 this assignment, is that recorded on the 11 computer system? 12 A Correct. 13 Q I'm mentioning Fidelity now and 14 we are starting with Fidelity. I'm not 15 sure if the system has changed or the 16 functions -- 17 A You are not confusing me, but if 18 you do I will let you know. 19 Q So Fidelity and LPS you would 20 describe them in similar terms in terms of 21 what they do? 22 A Correct. 23 Q How long did you have this 24 initial role at LPS at Fidelity? 25 A A year. 29 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q And then what did you do after 3 that? 4 A I was promoted. 5 Q What was your new job function? 6 A Supervisor. 7 Q And tell me your job functions 8 as supervisor? 9 A Managing operations specialist. 10 Q Give me, in general, we are not 11 here to go in-depth, about what happens at 12 LPS. But tell me just briefly in, and 13 generally what are some of the functions 14 that you did as when you talk about this, 15 the operations? 16 A We provide administrative 17 support to the technology system and help 18 folks use it. 19 Q Tell me who LPS' clients are? 20 MR. CASH: Object to that. It's 21 proprietary. Don't answer. It's not 22 relevant to this case. 23 Q The objection is noted. You may 24 answer. 25 MR. CASH: I'm instructing you 30 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 not to answer. 3 Q Is Chase a client of or customer 4 of LPS? 5 A To my understanding, 6 technically, no. 7 Q Let's continue with your job 8 functions. You were a supervisor for 9 approximately a year, you said. You said 10 that after a year you became a supervisor. 11 How long were you a supervisor? 12 A About a year and a half. 13 Q As part of your role as 14 supervisor, did you deal with anybody 15 outside of Fidelity? 16 A No. 17 Q Anybody you supervised still -- 18 A No. 19 Q How many people did you 20 supervise during that time period? 21 A 25. 22 Q And then after that, we are up 23 to approximately 2005 or so. So what did 24 you do after that? 25 A I was promoted. 31 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q And what was your job at that 3 point? 4 A Manager. 5 Q How long were you a manager? 6 A A year. 7 Q What were some of your functions 8 as a manager? 9 A Managing supervisors. 10 Q Did you deal with any outside 11 parties during that time period? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Who did you deal with? 14 A Attorneys and customers. 15 Q What did you do in connection 16 with dealing with attorneys and customers? 17 A I assisted them with using our 18 technology solution. 19 Q What did you do after that? 20 That takes us through 2006 or so. 21 So what did you do after that? 22 A I was promoted. 23 Q And what was your job title at 24 that point? 25 A Assistant vice-president. 32 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q I should ask, were all these 3 jobs in Minnesota? 4 A Yes. 5 Q At the same address? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And that address is? 8 A 1270 Northland Avenue, Mendota, 9 Minnesota, 55112. 10 Q So now you are an assistant VP 11 at the point we are talking about? 12 A Yes. 13 Q So what were your job functions 14 as assistant VP? 15 A Directing managers. 16 Q Do you still have that position? 17 A I do not. 18 Q So how long were you an 19 assistant? 20 A A year and a half. 21 Q How many people were under you 22 at that point? 23 A I had four direct reports. 24 Q And how many reported to them, 25 if you know? 33 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A 80. 3 Q Did you have contact with 4 outside parties as part of this job? 5 A Yes. 6 Q And who were they? 7 A Attorneys and customers. 8 Q Could customers be attorneys? 9 A I suppose they could, but I 10 don't see them as that way. 11 Q When you use the word 12 "customer," tell me who is a customer? 13 A My customers are entities within 14 the mortgage industry who use my 15 technology solution. And when I reference 16 "attorneys" I mean their attorneys. 17 Q So these entities can be 18 attorneys or non-attorneys? 19 A They can be. 20 Q Well, are they? 21 A No. 22 Q Are they both? 23 A No. 24 Q Well, when you referred to the 25 entities, just tell me what you are 34 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 referring to? 3 MR. CASH: Objection to your 4 question. You can answer it, if you 5 know what he is asking. 6 A Can you say it a different way. 7 Q I think you said that entities 8 within the mortgage industry that you 9 dealt with? 10 A Servicers, banks. 11 Q And you would reference these as 12 customers. So these were the customers of 13 Fidelity? 14 A Correct. 15 Q Now, I might not have been clear 16 with my question, but you had mentioned 17 attorneys could be or could not be. It 18 might have been my question was not clear. 19 But are any attorneys customers of 20 Fidelity as well? 21 A They certainly could be, but in 22 my job duties, attorneys are my customers 23 attorneys. 24 Q Okay. Well, how many more jobs 25 did you have after this one? 35 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A Just one more. 3 Q Let me ask you a few more 4 questions about this job that you had as 5 an assistant. 6 As part of your job function, 7 did you sign documents on behalf of 8 customers? 9 A I did. 10 Q And what kind of documents did 11 you sign? 12 A Assignments of mortgage, deeds 13 of trust, substitutions of trustee. 14 Q I will ask you a general 15 question that may not be a fair question, 16 but the assignments of mortgage, if we 17 focus on those, do you ever review the 18 information contained in the assignments 19 before you sign the assignments? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And what is the type of 22 information that you review? 23 A I review that the entity name in 24 which I'm executing on behalf of, I truly 25 have its authority to execute that 36 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 document. 3 Q Any other part of the document 4 that you review? 5 A No. 6 Q Is it fair to say that since you 7 started signing these assignments that 8 that is what you would check on the 9 assignments? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Has that procedure changed at 12 all since you started signing assignments? 13 A No. 14 Q Do you have, and when I say you 15 I'm talking about LPS and/or Fidelity, 16 does Fidelity and/or LPS have any 17 protocols in writing with respect to the 18 situations where you can sign an 19 assignment? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Is that in the form of a manual? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Has that manual been in 24 existence in one form or another since you 25 started signing these? 37 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A Yes. 3 Q Have you received any specific 4 training on when can you sign assignments? 5 A Yes. 6 Q How often do you get training on 7 that? 8 A I receive training on it at 9 least twice a year until I stopped signing 10 assignment in 2009. 11 Q Is it fair to say that you've 12 had that bi-yearly training since you 13 started signing those assignments? 14 A Yes. 15 Q And just to establish a 16 timeframe for that, it would be around 17 2005, 2006 is when you started signing 18 those? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And the manual has also been in 21 existence since that point? 22 A Yes. 23 Q I assume it's changed in certain 24 ways. But do you have copies of those 25 manuals going back to 2005? 38 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A I don't personally, like, 3 oversee the operation that owns the 4 manuals. So I couldn't say. 5 Q You are not involved with 6 creating those manuals, are you? 7 A No. 8 Q You mentioned that you signed 9 documents. 10 Let me take you through your 11 last position at LPS. Are we now in the 12 LPS realm of Fidelity as -- how did LPS 13 come to be your company that you work for? 14 A My personal recollection is that 15 it was a spin-off. 16 Q So you were an assistant 17 managing director at the time that the 18 spin-off occurred, correct? 19 A No. I had been promoted. 20 Q So you have been promoted to 21 your current position? 22 A Correct. 23 Q So tell me about your current 24 position. What do you do other than 25 supervising probably the assistants? 39 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A I am a vice-president with LPS 3 Default Solutions. I do oversee assistant 4 vice-presidents. 5 Q Tell me what your job functions 6 are generally? 7 A To manage the assistant 8 vice-presidents, and to direct them with 9 various projects, procedures, and 10 protocols. 11 Q Give me a little bit more meat 12 to that answer. You are not -- are you 13 involved with procuring customers? 14 A I am not. 15 Q Is that your department? 16 A It is not. 17 Q Are you involved with 18 interfacing with outside counsel and/or 19 customers? 20 A Yes. 21 Q And tell me what the nature of 22 those interactions are? 23 A Assisting both the customers and 24 the attorneys with using the technology 25 solutions we provide. 40 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q Tell me a little bit about, if 3 you can, in a few minutes, what technology 4 solutions you provided in the bankruptcy 5 area? 6 MR. CASH: I'm going to object. 7 Anything after 2008 -- 8 MR. ZIPES: You are objecting 9 before I ask the questions. I didn't 10 even finish asking the question. 11 MR. CASH: Okay. Finish asking. 12 Anything after 2008 isn't relevant. 13 We are something about something 14 he signed what did fit or does since 15 2008 is of no import in this case so 16 anything after the date of the 17 assignment, which is apparently in 18 question, in this case is not relevant 19 to any issue in this case. I'm not 20 going to have him go into it. And you 21 and I talked about this yesterday. 22 Assignment of mortgage answer any 23 questions about the assignment. So 24 that objection. 25 BY MR. ZIPES 41 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q Mr. Walter, I think we were 3 talking about when you became a 4 vice-president. 5 Is that what you became? 6 A Correct. 7 Q In your job functions, and you 8 were describing a little bit about your 9 job functions in connection with customers 10 and outside counsel. Is one of the things 11 that you helped outside customers on is in 12 connection with bankruptcy cases? 13 A Yes. 14 Q And what did you do? 15 A I assist customers and attorneys 16 with using our technology solutions that 17 track and monitor and liaison bankruptcy 18 activities. 19 Q Has that been your role since 20 you started as vice-president? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Are you responsible for a 23 particular geographical area? 24 A I am not. 25 Q Are you responsible for the 42 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 entire United States? 3 A Our technology platform for 4 bankruptcy is a nationwide template. 5 Q Do you oversee that? 6 A I do. 7 Q When you first started as 8 vice-president, did LPS prepare 9 assignments of mortgage? 10 A No. 11 Q So I think you testified before 12 that you signed assignments. What would 13 be the circumstances when you would sign 14 an assignment? 15 A First, I would have authority to 16 do so by my customer. Their attorney 17 would determine an assignment is required. 18 They would submit it to be executed. 19 Q Are you familiar with the term 20 "motion for relief from the automatic 21 stay?" 22 A I am. 23 Q Tell me what you think it is. 24 A Okay. Well, I do want to say 25 that I'm not an attorney. But my 43 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 understanding of MMFR, motion for relief 3 from the automatic stay, is a motion a 4 party files seeking relief from the 5 automatic stay that goes into place when a 6 bankruptcy is filed by a debtor or an 7 entity. 8 Q That's pretty good. Okay. 9 And are you familiar with what a 10 mortgage assignment is? 11 A I am. 12 Q What is your understanding of 13 what a mortgage assignment is? 14 A My understanding is it's a 15 document which assigns ownership of the 16 mortgage from one entity to another. 17 Q How many employees of LPS report 18 to you? 19 A 120. 20 Q That's been pretty consistent 21 since you have started as vice-president? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Do they all work out of your 24 office? 25 A Yes. 44 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q When you sign an assignment, is 3 it always in your office? 4 A Yes. 5 Q In connection with your present 6 job as vice-president, have you ever had 7 contact with employees of JP Morgan Chase? 8 A I have. 9 Q How do you communicate with 10 them: E-mail, telephone? 11 A Telephone and within the 12 technology solution. 13 Q What would be a reason to 14 communicate with them? 15 A A question about a process, or 16 assistance in developing the process to 17 track a certain activity, or to assist 18 their attorneys in procuring certain 19 things they may require. 20 Q Let me just focus on bankruptcy. 21 Do you have communications with 22 Chase in connection with 23 bankruptcy-related issues? 24 A I do. 25 Q And have you had that 45 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 communication with them since you started 3 as vice-president? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Do others in your department 6 also -- I'm calling it "the department." 7 What is the proper way of referring to the 8 people that -- 9 A My department. 10 Q Do other people in your 11 department also have contact with Chase in 12 connection with bankruptcy cases? 13 A Yes. 14 Q You referred to a computer 15 system before. When you started, when you 16 started as vice-president, what was the 17 name of that computer system? 18 A The LPS desktop. 19 Q Okay. I don't need a huge 20 explanation of this computer. Is this the 21 only one, this program, is this the only 22 one that you deal with? 23 A It is the only one I deal with. 24 Q Okay. So does outside counsel 25 or servicers have access to this LPS 46 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 desktop as well? 3 A Yes, they do. 4 Q Do they have access to 5 everything that you have access -- well, 6 tell me how it works. Tell me, is it done 7 by debtor, is it done by case, how is it 8 set up? 9 A It's done by loan number. And 10 if they want technology solution, if a 11 bankruptcy to have been filed on 12 particular loan number, the technology 13 solution would allow that bankruptcy to be 14 tracked by the attorney, and the customer, 15 and as well as tie in any subsequent loans 16 that may also be in the desktop. 17 Q And then it will notify -- is it 18 a particular letter system degree to a 19 certain degree it tells customers when 20 certain events are due and that sort of 21 thing? 22 A It does. The customers and the 23 attorneys use it to track many various 24 activities within bankruptcy. 25 Q But it doesn't generate an 47 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 assignment of mortgage or that sort of the 3 thing? 4 A No. The attorney drafts it. 5 Q You have clearly heard of Silvia 6 Nuer before today. I shouldn't say that. 7 Have you heard of the name 8 Silvia Nuer before today? 9 A Yes. 10 Q And in what context did you hear 11 of that name? 12 A Speaking to my attorney. 13 Q Are you aware that Silvia Nuer 14 had a mortgage that was the subject of a 15 motion for relief from the automatic stay 16 in this case? 17 A I am now aware. 18 Q But you just recently became 19 aware? 20 A Yes. 21 Q You didn't review any other 22 documents other than this assignment of 23 mortgage in connection with Silvia Nuer? 24 A No. 25 Q Would it be your job function to 48 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 review other documents in a bankruptcy 3 case? 4 A No. 5 Q Now, turning your attention to 6 UST/LPS 1. This is dated November 1, 7 2008. Do you know if this document was 8 actually assigned on November 1, 2008? 9 A I can say with a certainty that 10 it was. 11 Q Okay. So how can you say? 12 A Because I won't execute unless 13 the date is complete when the notary hands 14 it to me. 15 Q What about the writing 16 underneath "Scott Walter attorney in 17 fact," that would also be there before you 18 sign it? 19 A Yes. And I would check that 20 it's correct. 21 Q In this particular case, what 22 does "attorney in fact" mean? 23 A "Attorney in fact" is -- you 24 want a definition of "attorney in fact?" 25 Q No. What is your layman's 49 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 understanding of "attorney in fact?" 3 MR. CASH: Object to the extent 4 it calls for legal conclusion. But 5 your understanding you certainly can 6 give. 7 A My attorney said it's a document 8 from an individual or an entity giving 9 another individual or entity authority to 10 do certain things on their behalf. 11 Q Have you seen this document that 12 is the basis for indicating you're 13 attorney in fact? 14 A Yes. 15 Q What is that document? 16 A It's a document from Chase 17 authorizing my company to execute certain 18 documents on their behalf. 19 Q I'm not trying to trick you. Is 20 that the limited power of attorney, is 21 that what it would be? Can I show you a 22 document. Let's mark this as UST/LPS 23 Exhibit 2. 24 (UST/LPS Exhibit 2 was marked 25 for identification.) 50 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 BY MR. ZIPES 3 Q Mr. Walter, I will ask you if 4 you recognize this document? 5 A I do. 6 Q Is this the document that 7 provides you with that authority as 8 attorney in fact? 9 A That is my understanding. 10 Q Is this the document that you 11 would have referred to before you signed 12 this? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Is there any other document that 15 you would have referred to before signing 16 this? 17 A Likely not. 18 Q Okay. And, again, I just want 19 the record to be clear. 20 Do you actually recognize this 21 as being the document that you looked at? 22 MR. TEITELBAUM: Which document? 23 Q The limited power of attorney, 24 which is UST/LBS 2. And let me, just for 25 ease of reference, on the second page, 51 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 it's signed by James Miller, JP Morgan 3 Chase Bank, National Association. It's 4 dated October 22, 2008. 5 A Well, it's in my manual. 6 Q So there was no other limited 7 power of attorney to your knowledge? 8 A In relation to this assignment, 9 no. 10 Q Did you provide this limited 11 power of attorney to anybody in connection 12 with this case? 13 A I did not. 14 Q And the record should reflect 15 this has the name Scott Walter, 16 vice-president. 17 A It does. 18 Q Can you turn to page two of the 19 assignment which is UST's Exhibit 1? 20 A Um-hum. 21 Q And you will see there's a 22 notary indicated there. 23 A I do. 24 Q Do you know why this notary is 25 not on the page you signed it? 52 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A I couldn't say. 3 Q Do you know who -- 4 A It's Adrian Mitchell. 5 Q Does she work in your office? 6 A She does. 7 Q What is her position in your 8 office? 9 A She works on a team that 10 provides administrative assistance of 11 printing documents. 12 Q Did she actually see you sign 13 this document? 14 A I can't independently where she 15 saw me sign this one or not, but she does 16 watch me sign documents. 17 Q Have you signed any documents 18 that were subsequently notarized outside 19 your presence in the past? 20 A Not that I'm aware of. 21 Q As a practice, the notary would 22 actually be done in your presence? 23 A They would bring me the 24 document. They would watch me sign it. 25 Then they take it away. 53 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q So they wouldn't actually 3 physically sign their name necessarily, or 4 stamp it as a notary? 5 A They may. I couldn't say 6 whether they do or not. 7 Q You don't pay attention to it 8 one way or the other? 9 A That is one way to put it. 10 I just can't recall if every 11 time the notary, when I hand it back to 12 them, turns around to my desk in my corner 13 and stamps it right in front of me. But 14 they do watch me sign them. 15 Q Is there anything in your manual 16 that describes the procedure for signing 17 these, having a notary present when you 18 sign? 19 A I don't have personal knowledge 20 of a manual that would do that. The 21 manual I was referring to earlier is just 22 about the signing authorities and the 23 types of documents. 24 Q Okay. With respect to that 25 manual, just talking about the signing 54 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 authority section, how many pages is that? 3 A I couldn't say. 4 Q More than five? 5 A More than five. 6 Q This is just -- let me just ask 7 you again. I think I asked it before. 8 But I just wanted to be clear. You don't 9 have any independent recollection of 10 signing this actual assignment, do you? 11 A I do not. 12 Q Do you know who Daniel 13 Montgomery is? 14 A I do. 15 Q Who is she? 16 A Daniel Montgomery is an 17 operations specialist in our area. 18 Q Do you supervise her? 19 A Not directly. 20 Q Does she work in a different 21 department? 22 A She works in my department. 23 Q When you say "not directly," 24 does she indirectly, do you advise her 25 through someone else? 55 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A Yes. 3 Q Has she personally done any work 4 for you since in connection with this 5 case? 6 A Not that I can recall. 7 Q Does LPS have a record of 8 anybody within LPS who's worked on this 9 loan, I guess it would be by loan since 10 the bankruptcy filing? 11 A Technology solution, as part of 12 its standard function memorializes 13 quote-unquote touch on the file. 14 Q But you haven't reviewed that in 15 connection with this bankruptcy, this 16 deposition? 17 A I have not. 18 Q In connection with this 19 assignment, did anybody else at LPS other 20 than Adrian Mitchell work on this 21 assignment? 22 A Not that I'm aware of. I mean 23 other than the attorney who drafted it. 24 Q You have no recollection, as you 25 stated, so if I ask you questions about 56 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 whether you had any communications with 3 attorneys, you would have no recollection 4 of that? 5 A Well, I guess I could say the 6 attorney contacted us via technology 7 solution, that they required an assignment 8 by submitting it through the technology 9 solution. But if you remember, if you are 10 saying directly communicated with an 11 attorney, no. 12 Q And because I didn't ask that in 13 a clear way, you are stating that you have 14 no recollection of talking with an 15 attorney on this? 16 A I have no recollection. 17 Q Do you ever speak with attorneys 18 in connection when your signing an 19 assignment of mortgage? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Would that be your routine 22 practice to speak with the attorney? 23 A In certain circumstances. 24 Q And what would those 25 circumstances be? 57 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A The entity that I'm being asked 3 to execute under, I don't have the 4 authority to sign the document. So I may 5 reach out and say what are you trying to 6 assign and help liaison if the customer 7 needs to execute it, help push that over 8 to them. 9 Q And as part of this assignment 10 of mortgage it wouldn't be your role to 11 download this, and/or however it's done, 12 from outside counsel? Your job would be 13 just someone comes in and hands you this 14 assignment. 15 A The attorney submits it, 16 proactively sends it to me, yes, and then 17 there's a group that prints it and brings 18 it to me. 19 Q Have you ever dealt with the 20 Baum law firm personally? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Do you know who Natalie Grigg 23 is? 24 A No. 25 Q Do you know who Amy Polowy is? 58 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A I do. 3 Q Have you spoken with anyone at 4 the Baum firm within the last four months? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Is it frequent? 7 A It depends what you define 8 frequent. I don't want to get semantical, 9 but I have spoken with them more than once 10 in the past four months. 11 Q Not about this case, correct? 12 A No, no. 13 Q So if -- I'm assuming you didn't 14 ask -- 15 A I have not spoken to the Baum 16 law firm with regard to this case. 17 Q So if an affidavit was prepared 18 by Natalie Grigg in this case you wouldn't 19 have reviewed that affidavit? 20 A No. 21 Q Do you know if anybody at LPS 22 did review an affidavit? 23 A I couldn't say. 24 Q If someone had, would it be 25 indicated in that screen that shows the 59 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 touch, as you refer, what did you call it? 3 A Well, it's the notes section of 4 our LPS desktop. 5 MR. ZIPES: Okay. I have no 6 further questions at this time. We 7 are going to put some issues before 8 the Court, but I will ask again, that 9 that the request in the subpoena be 10 complied with with respect to the 11 default and services agreement with 12 any amendments thereto, be produced, 13 and also my office is willing to 14 consider any reasonable 15 confidentiality agreement that counsel 16 wants to send along, but we have not 17 received that to date. And that 18 request is coming for the first time 19 at this deposition. So it may get 20 resolved tomorrow. Or it may not get 21 resolved tomorrow. 22 MR. CASH: Since that got put on 23 the record, I will reiterate, I have 24 brought the document. It is here. It 25 is available to all counsel to utilize 60 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 in deposition if they choose. The 3 only thing I ask in return is that we 4 have an agreement that for the limited 5 purpose of this deposition the 6 document will be held in confidence, 7 it will not be utilized in any other 8 case, or for any other purpose. 9 Any portions of the document 10 which are referenced in the deposition 11 will be marked as confidential as 12 well, the deposition testimony, and it 13 will be sealed for the purposes of 14 this deposition. That does not waive 15 anybody's right to later seek the 16 document in toto. It does not waive 17 anybody's right to later use the 18 document if so ordered in a more 19 global manner. 20 It is simply a way to clear the 21 hurdle today of not having access to 22 the document so that every one has. 23 Ability to use it today without me 24 waiving my right to its protection. 25 That is all I'm trying to accomplish. 61 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 MR. ZIPES: Okay. 3 MR. CASH: So I making a offer 4 again. 5 MR. ZIPES: So we are going to 6 put it before the Court. And it's 7 possible that everybody will be back 8 here to be examined so that the 9 witness can be examined on this 10 document. 11 MR. TEITELBAUM: Wait. Before 12 we perhaps move forward, in fairness 13 to all, I will state for the record, I 14 would be in favor of trying to proceed 15 along the lines suggested by counsel. 16 The document is here, the 17 witness is here, everyone's rights are 18 here, that is up to you. 19 But procedurally I want Mr. Cash 20 to be fully aware of precisely what 21 you are saying. There is a telephonic 22 conference before the Court tomorrow 23 on Chase's motion for protective 24 order. That is telephonic. You can 25 choose to be a party to it or not. 62 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 But what I'm hearing Mr. Zipe say is 3 he is going to raise these issues 4 tomorrow. So I will state for the 5 record I am not here representing LPS. 6 Mr. Cash is. I would not be able to 7 and I will not take any position at 8 the conference tomorrow with respect 9 to these issues. Just as I have not 10 taken a position today, this is LPS 11 proprietary work product. They are 12 taking their positions. So I am not 13 taking that position. 14 I just wanted to be clear for 15 the record before the court. 16 MR. ZIPES: That -- 17 MR. CASH: It's clear. LPS has 18 no formal -- LPS is not a party to 19 this. 20 MR. ZIPES: That's the 409th 21 time you've said that. 22 MR. CASH: The first LPS no is 23 not a party. The Court does not have 24 any jurisdiction over LPS in this 25 case. LPS is a corporation. We are 63 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 in Florida. This gentleman is here 3 from Minnesota. We are here as an 4 accommodation. If they want to have a 5 hearing on a motion that is not before 6 the Court, or on documents that are 7 not before the Court, then apparently 8 that is whatever the U.S. Trustee's 9 Office thinks is appropriate. 10 We will seek our protection in 11 the proper courts in the proper 12 jurisdictions to the extent they are 13 necessary, if we are ever properly 14 served with a subpoena. 15 MR. ZIPES: I will state one 16 other item for the record. 107 favors 17 open proceedings. And we are not 18 going to preemptively close this 19 hearing because some attorney is 20 saying he has a right to call 21 something confidential. You are going 22 to have your burden that whether it's 23 before this court or some other court 24 and we will deal with it. But the 25 statement that you are going 64 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 preemptively stated that something is 3 confidential without having the Court 4 rule on it and violate the basic 5 premise that these proceedings are 6 supposed to be each proceedings 7 without giving any notice and without 8 giving any explanation as to why that 9 is the case or not trying to limit 10 your request deem these confidential, 11 it's a big problem from my office's 12 perspective. And you are absolutely 13 right, we will deal with that in the 14 right court, whether it's the 15 bankruptcy courts or we will figure 16 that out. 17 MR. CASH: Perhaps you didn't 18 understand my offer. I am not asking 19 for anyone to have a conclusive ruling 20 of confidentiality. 21 MR. ZIPES: I'm not accepting 22 your premise -- you have already said 23 four times what your offer is. So we 24 can move on. We are just wasting 25 time. Do you have anything? 65 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 MR. CASH: I'm going to go ahead 3 and finish my statement. 4 What I am offering, again, 5 because apparently it's unclear to the 6 United States Trustee, is not a ruling 7 that this is confidential. Not a 8 pre-emptive designation that this is 9 confidential for all future purposes. 10 What I am saying is, in order to 11 accommodate everyone, the witness is 12 here, we are here, the document is 13 here. Debtor's counsel is here. 14 Chase counsel is here. The U.S. 15 Trustee is here. 16 The U.S. Trustee thinks that 17 there may be some relevance to this 18 document. I disagree. But I have 19 brought it. 20 I only ask that because there is 21 clearly a disagreement on the 22 propriety of the subpoena, there is 23 clearly a disagreement as to whether 24 or not we have to be here, unless that 25 is resolved, rather than have 66 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 everybody re-assemble, can we treat 3 the document as confidential for 4 today, only with everyone reserving 5 the right to challenge that or require 6 me to establish it at a later date. 7 The only thing I'm trying to avoid is 8 giving the document today and then 9 before it can be properly ruled on 10 having it used in a nonconfidential 11 way. 12 So what I'm trying to do is 13 accommodate everybody's concerns: 14 Yours to have the document. Mine to 15 protect it. To protect my rights 16 regarding whether the subpoena is 17 appropriate. But to not simply 18 unilaterally determine it's not. So I 19 have brought the document and simply 20 asked that it be kept confidential 21 until such time as the Court can rule 22 on it with you reserving all rights to 23 argue that it's not and me having to 24 proffer that it is. I'm trying 25 accommodate everyone. 67 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 MR. ZIPES: The burden would be 3 on you. So the record is clear, we 4 can go on. You got the last word. So 5 go ahead. 6 MS. TIRELLI: Let's take a 7 break. 8 (Recess from the record.) 9 BY MS. TIRELLI: 10 Q Mr. Walter, my name is Linda 11 Tirelli. I represent the debtor, Silvia 12 Nuer, in this case. I do want to thank 13 you for coming from Minnesota to testify 14 today. I do appreciate it. 15 I'm going to be asking you some 16 questions. If I'm repetitive of what Mr. 17 Zipes has already asked you, just bear 18 with me. 19 I'm going to try to skip over 20 the questions if they do seem repetitive. 21 Have you ever been deposed before? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And how many times? 24 A Less than 10. 25 Q Over what period of time would 68 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 you say you were deposed less than 10? 3 A Last five years. 4 Q Have you been deposed this year 5 at all? 6 A In what capacity? Work. 7 Q In what cases? 8 A Am I allowed to say this? It 9 was a case in Washington. 10 Q Any other cases? 11 A Not that I recall. 12 Q And that case is in Washington. 13 Did that also deal with Chase? 14 A Not that I recall. 15 Q Washington Mutual? 16 A Not that I recall. 17 Q Long Beach Mortgage Loan 18 Company? 19 A Not that I recall. 20 Q What do you recall about that 21 case in Washington? 22 A Just that I was deposed and they 23 were asking about an assignment of 24 mortgage I signed. 25 Q Do you recall who the attorney 69 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 was that deposed you? 3 A I don't recall. But I do -- I 4 mean, I have her name in my records. 5 Q Does the name Melissa Hullsman 6 ring a bell? 7 A I can't say for sure. 8 Q Are you familiar with any cases 9 currently pending in the United States 10 outside of New York involving LPS and JP 11 Morgan Chase? 12 A Not that I'm aware of. 13 Q Are you familiar with an entity 14 known as Deutsche Bank? 15 A Yes. 16 Q That is the trustee for a 17 particular trust having to do with this 18 case? 19 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 20 Form. 21 A Can you say it a different way. 22 Q Sure. 23 If you take a look at the 24 assignment of mortgage that you signed. 25 If you could just identify for me who the 70 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 assignee is? 3 A Deutsche Bank National Trust 4 Company, as trustee for Long Beach 5 Mortgage Trust, et cetera, 2006-2003. 6 Witness hand from a Lastenia, California 7 06771. 8 Q So when you signed that 9 assignment of mortgage, that was the 10 entity that was actually accepting the 11 assignment? 12 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. Go 13 ahead. 14 A I mean, it is the assignee, but 15 it appears from this document it's a 16 assignment of mortgage keeping the change 17 through the different entity changes. And 18 I signed it as a attorney in fact for 19 Chase for Deutsche. 20 Q I'm sorry. You signed it as 21 attorney in fact for Deutsche? 22 A I didn't mean it the way you 23 said it. So I will restate my answer: 24 That I signed as attorney in fact for JP 25 Morgan Chase bank. 71 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q If you look at that assignment. 3 It indicates that there was consideration 4 passed between parties. Do you see a 5 paragraph indicating that? 6 A I see the paragraph. 7 Q Am I right that it says in the 8 sum of one dollar and other viable 9 consideration paid to the above assignor 10 you received sufficiency which is 11 acknowledged by the scene hereby assigns. 12 Is there is there an actual 13 receipt for any consideration that has 14 been passed between these parties? 15 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 16 Relevance. 17 MR. CASH: Objection. Calls for 18 speculation. 19 A I couldn't say. 20 Q Are you aware of any? 21 A Not that I am aware of. 22 Q Did you negotiate this deal? 23 A No. 24 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 25 BY MS. TIRELLI: 72 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q So when you signed this 3 assignment, what was your understanding 4 that you were actually doing? 5 A My understanding is that the 6 attorney was doing some sort of review in 7 regard to the title. They decided or 8 determined they needed this assignment of 9 mortgage. It was drafted and submitted to 10 me. I verified I could execute it. So I 11 executed it. 12 Q So when you executed it, was it 13 your intention at that time to actually be 14 conveying property owned by Chase to some 15 other entity? 16 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 17 A Can you say it one more time. 18 Q What was your intention when you 19 signed this document, what did you intend 20 for this document to do exactly? 21 A To exercise the assignment as 22 drafted by the attorney on Chase's behalf. 23 Q So it was your continued 24 understanding that by signing this you 25 were actually transferring property that 73 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 belonged to Chase? When I say property, I 3 mean the actual homeowner of the loan. 4 MR. TEITELBAUM: Jay, are you 5 asking for his understanding? 6 MR. CASH: It calls for a legal 7 conclusion. 8 Q I'm asking for your 9 understanding. You signed the document. 10 MR. CASH: Objection. His 11 understanding is irrelevant. The 12 legal export is that you will and that 13 calls for a legal conclusion. 14 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 15 BY MS. TIRELLI: 16 Q What was your understanding of 17 the effect of this document at the time 18 that he signed it? 19 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 20 Relevance. 21 MR. CASH: Same objection. Go 22 ahead. 23 Q You can answer. 24 A I don't know what was in the 25 attorney's mind. 74 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q Do you recall the attorney 3 asking you to assign this? 4 A I do not have personal 5 recollection of this assignment of 6 mortgage. 7 Q But you are sure that an 8 attorney asked you to sign this? 9 A I can say that the standard 10 procedures and the procedures comes, which 11 I follow every time, that an attorney 12 drafted this assignment, and asked it to 13 be executed. 14 Q Did you do any sort of research 15 before signing this document to make sure 16 that Chase actually owned the loan that 17 was to be assigned? 18 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. You 19 are assuming facts -- 20 MS. TIRELLI: I'm asking if he 21 did research. 22 MR. TEITELBAUM: -- I will state 23 that are not in evidence. 24 BY MS. TIRELLI: 25 Q You can answer. 75 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A Can you just re-read. 3 (The question was read back by 4 the court reporter as recorded above.) 5 MR. TEITELBAUM: State my 6 objection. Go ahead. 7 A No. 8 Q Did you at any time do any 9 research as to find out who owns this 10 loan? 11 A No. 12 Q So the time that you signed this 13 it would be fair to say that you didn't 14 know who owned this loan? 15 A At the time I signed this 16 document I did not know personally who 17 owned the loan. 18 Q But yet you signed the document 19 as attorney in fact for Chase, to assign 20 this loan, correct? 21 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 22 Calling for legal conclusion again. 23 MR. CASH: Don't answer that. 24 It's a legal conclusion. We are not 25 asleep. 76 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 BY MS. TIRELLI: 3 Q What was your understanding in 4 terms of relationship when you signed this 5 document on behalf of Chase? 6 A Whose relationship with Chase? 7 Q LPS. 8 A My understanding is that I am a 9 duly-appointed officer on the limited 10 power of attorney and Chase had given me 11 authority to execute assignments of 12 mortgages on their behalf. 13 Q So you are an officer of Chase 14 as per that document? 15 A No. My understanding is that 16 I'm just a power of attorney limited to 17 the document UST/LBS 2. 18 Q Do you work for Chase? 19 A I do not. 20 Q Have you ever worked for Chase? 21 A I have not. 22 Q Have you ever received a 1099 23 from Chase? 24 A I have not. 25 Q Have you ever received a pay 77 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 check from Chase? 3 A I have not. 4 Q Gratuity? 5 A No. 6 MR. CASH: We will stipulate he 7 doesn't friggin' work for Chase. 8 MS. TIRELLI: Thank you. 9 BY MS. TIRELLI: 10 Q What is the network agreement? 11 MR. CASH: Objection. Not 12 relevant to any issue in this case. 13 Don't answer that. What our 14 agreements are proprietary. 15 MS. TIRELLI: I asked -- 16 MR. CASH: I heard the question. 17 And I made the objection and I made 18 the instruction. What is your next 19 question? 20 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 21 Relevance. 22 BY MS. TIRELLI: 23 Q Do you know what a network 24 agreement? 25 A A network agreement. 78 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 MR. CASH: Do you know what it 3 is? It's a yes or no. 4 A Yes. 5 Q Do you know whether or not there 6 was a network agreement between LPS and 7 Chase? 8 A I don't know. 9 Q Do you know whether or not there 10 is a network agreement between Fidelity 11 and Washington Mutual? 12 A Not that I'm aware of. I'm not 13 a contract guy. 14 Q Who would be in charge then of 15 knowing what contracts exist between the 16 various entities? 17 MR. CASH: Objection. 18 A I couldn't say. 19 Q I think you testified back in 20 the beginning that technically Chase is 21 not a client. 22 A Just reviewing with my attorney 23 preparing for this deposition we reviewed 24 various topics. 25 Q Okay. So what do you mean by 79 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 technically they are not a client? 3 A It is my understanding that any 4 agreements that may or may have been in 5 place with Washington Mutual are legacied 6 to Chase. However, I'm not personally 7 aware of any agreement with Chase itself. 8 Q As far as you know, is this loan 9 currently being serviced by Chase? 10 A I don't personally know. 11 Q Would you have access to that 12 information? 13 A I would have access to a 14 memorialized record of it if it was in our 15 system. 16 Q When a client requires services, 17 how is it that the network firms are 18 assigned, if you know? 19 MR. CASH: Objection. No, no, 20 no. Objection. That is proprietary. 21 That is what we do internally. We are 22 not going to answer that. It's not 23 relevant to any issue in this case. 24 BY MS. TIRELLI: 25 Q Is LPS a publicly-traded 80 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 company? 3 A Yes. 4 Q As such, there are documents 5 that are on file with the Securities and 6 Exchange Commission, correct? 7 A Yes. 8 Q And are you familiar with the 9 documents that are on file with the 10 Securities and Exchange Commission? 11 A No. 12 Q What is "referral" as that term 13 is used within your company? 14 MR. CASH: Objection. Not 15 relevant to any matter in this case. 16 Don't answer that. This isn't a 17 deposition about LPS and how it does 18 business. We will answer all the 19 questions in the world about this case 20 and this document. We are not going 21 to answer any more questions about 22 LPS. And that is where we will just 23 -- we will just go home. 24 So proceed as you wish, but it 25 may not be for very long if we don't 81 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 change the line of questioning real 3 fast here. 4 BY MS. TIRELLI: 5 Q When this document was signed, 6 how was that billed and to whom it was 7 billed? 8 A I couldn't say. 9 Q Do you keep a log of the 10 assignments that you execute? 11 A The LPS desktop memorializes all 12 of them. 13 Q And is there a particular fee 14 that is charged? 15 MR. CASH: Objection. 16 Proprietary. Don't answer. 17 MS. TIRELLI: I do have about 18 actually -- 19 MR. CASH: Then get to those. 20 Next question about LPS general 21 business practices and fees and all 22 that, it's over, we are leaving. 23 MS. TIRELLI: You made your 24 point. No need to grandstand. 25 MR. CASH: I'm just making you 82 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 understand because the last attempt 3 you didn't. So I'm going to give you 4 one more chance. Go ahead. 5 BY MS. TIRELLI: 6 Q Mr. Walter, when this was 7 executed, was Ms. Nuer billed for that 8 action? 9 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 10 A I don't know. 11 Q Well, who would pay for that? 12 A I don't know. 13 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 14 Q Is that something Chase would 15 bill the client? 16 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 17 A I don't know. 18 Q When attorneys' fees through 19 your network are billed to the client, 20 when I'm saying to the borrower, is there 21 any credit given for any monies that are 22 paid back to LPS? 23 MR. CASH: Okay. We are gone. 24 MR. TEITELBAUM: I want to put 25 an objection. Each one of my prior 83 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 objections, none of these questions 3 related to any of the issues in this 4 case. Putting aside anything LPS 5 counsel is saying about proprietary or 6 confidential, they do not relate to a 7 single issue in this case. They are 8 not in a single objection to the 9 motion for relief filed. 10 And in the type of questioning 11 which will be subjected to our hearing 12 before the judge tomorrow. 13 MR. CASH: And for the record, 14 LPS came as an accommodation. We came 15 here to try to answer questions about 16 a document that clearly is in issue. 17 One of our employees executed it. And 18 we came here to answer any questions 19 about that document that the U.S. 20 Trustee or anybody else had. Debtor's 21 counsel. 22 We didn't come here to testify 23 on LPS business practices. LPS is not 24 a party in this case. LPS is not here 25 to answer questions about its business 84 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 practices, and its fees, and what it 3 charges and what it doesn't. Those 4 are proprietary. 5 Now, I'm asking you one more 6 time: Do you have questions about 7 this document that do not have to do 8 with LPS business practices? 9 MR. ZIPES: Please don't point 10 your finger. That is ridiculous. 11 MS. TIRELLI: Thank you, Greg, 12 for that. 13 MR. CASH: Do you have any 14 questions about this document period? 15 MS. TIRELLI: I do have 16 questions regarding how a document 17 executed by an employee of LPS 18 purporting to be an officer of Chase 19 ended up in this case? Yes, I do have 20 some. 21 MR. TEITELBAUM: No one is 22 purporting to be an officer of Chase. 23 That was not the testimony. That is 24 not what the document says. And the 25 record is not going to be muddied by 85 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 your characterizations. That's wrong, 3 Ms. Tirelli. I really must object to 4 those characterizations. So you want 5 to stick to the facts, stick to the 6 facts. The witness testified he is 7 not an officer of Chase. He is not an 8 employee of Chase. The document 9 provide that he is an officer of LPS 10 with a power of attorney. Those are 11 the documents that have been marked. 12 MR. CASH: The only thing I see, 13 Exhibit 1 is what you had by Scott 14 Walter attorney in fact. Never says 15 as an officer. And there is nowhere 16 in the limited power of attorney that 17 it references him as an officer of 18 Chase. So do you have any more 19 questions about these documents? 20 BY MS. TIRELLI: 21 Q Are you familiar with the list 22 of parties on this limited power of 23 attorney? 24 A I am. 25 Q Are they all currently employees 86 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 of LPS? 3 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection to 4 relevance. 5 A To the best of my knowledge, 6 yes. 7 Q Are you familiar with what 8 pooling and servicing agreement is? 9 A I understand what a pooling and 10 servicing agreement is, yes. 11 Q What is your understanding of 12 what a pooling and servicing agreement is? 13 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 14 A In the simplest sense, my 15 understanding is that it's an agreement 16 between a pool and their servicer on how 17 they are going to service whatever the 18 pool has asked them to service or hired 19 them to service. 20 Q Have you seen a pooling and 21 servicing agreement in this case? 22 A No. 23 Q Are you aware of whether or not 24 this particular loan is owned by a trust? 25 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 87 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q I'm asking if you are aware. 3 A I am aware. 4 Q Of? 5 A Your question. 6 Q Okay. I'm sorry. Are you aware 7 who owns this loan? 8 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 9 A No. 10 Q Are you aware of whether or not 11 this loan was transferred into a trust 12 prior to 2008? 13 A No. 14 Q Did you do anything to research 15 that before signing this document? 16 A No. I relied on counsel. 17 Q And where does counsel receive 18 their information from? 19 MR. CASH: Objection. Calls for 20 speculation. 21 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. 22 A You would have to ask them. 23 Q Maybe I'm just trying to 24 understand what LPS' role is here. It 25 seems to me that LPS, and correct me where 88 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 I'm wrong here, is some sort of 3 intermediary between the servicers and the 4 attorneys. 5 MR. CASH: Object to the 6 characterization. Relevance. 7 Q Could you explain that 8 relationship. I'm not clear on why -- 9 MR. CASH: Bye-bye. We're gone. 10 Thanks, y'all. 11 MR. ZIPES: You have been served 12 with a subpoena as well. It was 13 placed in the hands of -- 14 MR. CASH: We will take it. But 15 I'm -- do you have a copy of the Rule 16 45 at all? Would you like me to send 17 it to you? 18 MR. ZIPES: I'm not answering 19 any of your questions. 20 MR. TEITELBAUM: I actually had 21 two questions I could ask. 22 MS. TIRELLI: I have not 23 finished my line of questioning for 24 the record. 25 MR. CASH: Oh, yeah, you have. 89 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 MR. TEITELBAUM: I'm not trying 3 to cut you off. 4 MS. TIRELLI: I understand. I'm 5 stating for the record that I have not 6 completed my line of questioning. 7 MR. ZIPES: Neither has the U.S. 8 Trustee's Office. 9 MS. TIRELLI: I would like to 10 continue this. 11 MR. TEITELBAUM: Two quick 12 questions. 13 BY MR. TEITELBAUM: 14 Q Mr. Walter, Jay Teitelbaum, 15 attorney for Chase. 16 You testified, I believe, that 17 the outside counsel proactively, and I 18 wrote it down, sends the assignment to 19 you. 20 Do they send it to you 21 personally? Do they send it to LPS? 22 A They send it to LPS desktop. 23 Q I want to clarify that it's not 24 identified for your signature in 25 particular? 90 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A No. 3 Q So there are other people at LPS 4 who might have executed assignments other 5 than yourself? 6 A Yes. 7 Q The other question I had was, 8 you had mentioned that the technology 9 solution memorializes every touch. That 10 technology is accessible to the client as 11 well as to LPS, correct? 12 A Absolutely. 13 MR. TEITELBAUM: Thank you. 14 MR. CASH: Does anybody have any 15 more questions about the? 16 MS. TIRELLI: When you state 17 access to the client, who is the 18 client? 19 MR. TEITELBAUM: Objection. My 20 question was client. And I didn't 21 say -- 22 MR. ZIPES: Which apparently we 23 are not allowed to ask, but apparently 24 you are asking. 25 MR. TEITELBAUM: In fairness, 91 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 the question that was objected to was 3 to identify specific clients of LPS. 4 And I didn't ask that question. I 5 just asked -- 6 MR. ZIPES: You asked a general 7 question which we are not allowed to 8 ask. 9 MS. TIRELLI: Could we have the 10 question read, please. Have the read 11 question read back. 12 MR. CASH: You have been allowed 13 to ask general questions. 14 MS. TIRELLI: He can answer any 15 questions, he was asked our attorneys 16 clients. Do you have clients? That 17 is fine. When you ask the specific 18 identity of our specific clients, that 19 is proprietary, and we are not going 20 to answer those questions. 21 So you asked is it accessible to 22 the clients in general. Able to 23 answer that. If you want to ask 24 questions about this document, not 25 yourselves. 92 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 What we are not going to sit 3 here and do and go through what LPS 4 does, what their business is. We are 5 not going to do that and I have tried 6 to make it as clear as I can. 7 If nobody has any other 8 questions about this document. 9 MR. TEITELBAUM: One more 10 question. 11 MS. TIRELLI: But I have asked 12 to have that question read back. 13 (The question was read back by 14 the court reporter as recorded above.) 15 MR. TEITELBAUM: Two more, if I 16 may. 17 BY MR. TEITELBAUM: 18 Q I believe, Mr. Walter, prior to 19 executing what's been marked as UST/LPS 1, 20 did you, in fact, determine that you had 21 authority to execute this document? 22 A My procedures and protocols are 23 to do so. And I follow my procedures 24 every time. 25 Q And just tell me, what are the 93 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 procedures that you followed to make that 3 determination, recognizing that you don't 4 necessarily have specific recollection of 5 this document? 6 A I have a manual, and my business 7 knowledge of my signing authorities 8 provided to me in the signing authority 9 for my customers. I will check the 10 signatory block. And then I will verify 11 in my manual that I have the authority. 12 And if so, I will execute it. If not, I 13 will not. 14 MR. TEITELBAUM: Thank you. 15 MR. CASH: Anybody else on the 16 document? Any other questions on the 17 execution of the document. 18 MS. TIRELLI: Not at this time. 19 But I'm reserving my right to ask 20 questions again later. 21 MR. CASH: Let me ask you a 22 couple of questions. 23 BY MR. CASH: 24 Q Do you know if LPS is a party in 25 this case? 94 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 A I do not know. 3 Q Is this deposition site more 4 than 100 miles from where you reside? 5 A It is. 6 Q Is it more than 100 miles from 7 where you are employed? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Is it more than 100 miles from 10 where you regularly transact business? 11 A It is. 12 Q Were you ever personally served 13 with a deposition notice by anyone over 14 the age of 18 prior to today? 15 A No. 16 Q It was sent to Sheryl Newman at 17 LPS, correct? 18 A I believe so. 19 Q And this is not a subpoena to 20 LPS, it is to Scott Walter, to you. 21 A Actually, that is not me. 22 Q Why not? 23 A Because my name is Scott Walter. 24 Q That is not even you? 25 A No. 95 1 SCOTT WALTER 2 Q And you have never been served 3 with a subpoena in your name personally? 4 A No. 5 MR. CASH: All right. Thanks. 6 We're out. 7 8 [TIME NOTED: 1:25 p.m.] 9 ____________________________ SCOTT WALTER 10 11 ________________________ 12 Subscribed and sworn to before me this _________ 13 day of ________________, 2010. 14 _______________________ Notary Public 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 96 1 2 I N D E X 3 WITNESS EXAMINATION BY PAGE 4 5 SCOTT WALTER MR. ZIPES 7 6 MS. TIRELLI 67 7 8 E X H I B I T S 9 EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE 10 UST/LPS 1 Assignment of 11 mortgage 20 12 UST/LPS 2 Limited power of attorney 50 13 14 15 Attorney GREG ZIPES, from UNITED STATES TRUSTEES OFFICE has retained all 16 exhibits. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 97 1 2 CERTIFICATION 3 4 I, DALE W. TICE, RPR, a 5 Notary Public for and within the State of 6 New York, do hereby certify: 7 That the witness whose 8 testimony as herein set forth, was duly 9 sworn by me; and that the within 10 transcript is a true record of the 11 testimony given by said witness. 12 I further certify that I am 13 not related to any of the parties to this 14 action by blood or marriage, and that I am 15 in no way interested in the outcome of 16 this matter. 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have 18 hereunto set my hand this 16th day of 19 March, 2010. 20 21 _______________________ 22 DALE W. TICE, RPR 23 * * * 24 25 98 1 2 ERRATA SHEET VERITEXT/NEW YORK REPORTING, LLC 3 CASE NAME: IN RE: SILVIA NUER, Debtor 4 DATE OF DEPOSITION: March 16, 2010 WITNESS' NAME: Scott Walter 5 PAGE/LINE(S)/ CHANGE REASON 6 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 7 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 8 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 9 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 10 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 11 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 12 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 13 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 14 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 15 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 16 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 17 ____/_______/_________________/________ ____/_______/_________________/________ 18 ____/_______/_________________/________ 19 _______________________ 20 SCOTT WALTER 21 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO 22 BEFORE ME THIS______DAY OF_______________, 2010. 23 _______________________ 24 NOTARY PUBLIC 25 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES__________________