MBIA Ins. Corp. v Residential Funding Co., LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 34229(U) May 9, 2011 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2008 Judge:

Similar documents
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/15/ :27 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 49 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/15/2016 EXHIBIT E

Punwaney v Punwaney 2016 NY Slip Op 31178(U) June 23, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2014 Judge: Manuel J.

Robinson Brog Leinwand Greene Genovese & Gluck, P.C. v Basch 2017 NY Slip Op 30166(U) January 26, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

CMS, Risk Mgt. Holdings, LLC v Skyline Eng'g, L.L.C NY Slip Op 32304(U) November 17, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Sherwood Apparel LLC v Active Brands Intl., Inc NY Slip Op 33284(U) January 5, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2011

National Steel Supply, Inc. v Ideal Steel Supply, Inc NY Slip Op 30176(U) February 6, 2015 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: /11

300 CPW Apts. Corp. v Wells 2013 NY Slip Op 32612(U) October 17, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Cynthia S.

Ebanks v Otis El. Co NY Slip Op 33252(U) December 20, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Cynthia S.

Hoffinger Stern & Ross, LLP v Oberman 2010 NY Slip Op 31467(U) June 8, 2010 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Judith J.

Candlewood Timber Group, LLC v Candlewood Tib 2011 NY Slip Op 33994(U) November 9, 2011 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /09

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Austin Diagnostic Med., P.C NY Slip Op 30917(U) April 18, 2016 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number:

Broadway W. Enters., Ltd. v Doral Money, Inc NY Slip Op 32912(U) November 12, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2011

Sethi v Singh 2011 NY Slip Op 33814(U) July 18, 2011 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 4958/11 Judge: Howard G. Lane Cases posted with a "30000"

Morpheus Capital Advisors LLC v UBS AG 2011 NY Slip Op 34096(U) January 3, 2011 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Barbara R.

Garcia v City of New York 2014 NY Slip Op 30364(U) February 10, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: Kathryn E.

Ninth Ave. Realty, LLC v Guenancia 2010 NY Slip Op 33927(U) November 12, 2010 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /10 Judge: Eileen A.

Leaf Capital Funding, LLC v Morelli Alters Ratner, P.C NY Slip Op 32475(U) October 8, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Atria Retirement Props., L.P. v Bradford 2012 NY Slip Op 33460(U) August 22, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /11 Judge:

State of New York v ERW Enter., Inc NY Slip Op 30592(U) April 14, 2015 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Debra A.

Choi v Korowitz 2013 NY Slip Op 33944(U) August 15, 2013 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Bernice D. Siegal Cases posted

Onyx Asset Mgt., LLC v 9th & 10th St. LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 30875(U) May 10, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Manuel

Zaremby v Takashimaya N.Y., LLC 2010 NY Slip Op 33939(U) July 21, 2010 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /08 Judge: Louis B.

Devers v Imperium Partners Group, Inc NY Slip Op 32508(U) October 9, 2013 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Joan A.

Chamalu Mgt. Inc. v Waterbridge Cap., LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32951(U) November 18, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge:

Kaplan v Bernsohn & Fetner, LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 32264(U) August 19, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Cynthia S.

Pratt v 32 W. 22nd St., LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 31866(U) August 23, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Kathryn E.

Fundamental Long Term Care Holdings, LLC v Cammeby's Funding, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32113(U) August 30, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number:

Ownit Mtge. Loan Trust v Merrill Lynch Mtge. Lending, Inc NY Slip Op 32303(U) December 7, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Patapova v Duncan Interiors, Inc NY Slip Op 33013(U) November 27, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: Joan A.

Signature Bank v Atlas Race LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 32366(U) November 28, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Kathryn E.

Zen Restoration, Inc. v Hirsch 2017 NY Slip Op 31737(U) August 14, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /17 Judge: Lynn R.

FCS Group, LLC v Chica 2018 NY Slip Op 33433(U) November 5, 2018 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: /18 Judge: Leonard Livote Cases

Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v Webster Bus. Credit Corp NY Slip Op 33850(U) April 13, 2010 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /2009 Judge: Richard

New York Athletic Club of the City of N.Y. v Florio 2013 NY Slip Op 31882(U) August 9, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge:

Golden v Ameritube, LLC 2010 NY Slip Op 30461(U) March 3, 2010 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Judith J.

Paradigm Credit Corp. v Zimmerman 2013 NY Slip Op 31915(U) July 23, 2013 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Joan A. Madden Republished

Complex Strategies, Inc. v AA Ultrasound, Inc NY Slip Op 32723(U) October 11, 2016 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: Judge:

LG Funding, LLC v City N. Grill Corp NY Slip Op 33290(U) December 14, 2018 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: /2017 Judge:

Arthur v Gager 2013 NY Slip Op 31913(U) August 12, 2013 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Cynthia S. Kern Republished from New York

Matter of Miller v Roque 2016 NY Slip Op 30381(U) March 5, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Jr., Alexander W.

FECP Headlee Newburg Mgt. Invs. 10/06 LLC v Headlee Mgt.

Nall v Estate of Powell 2012 NY Slip Op 33413(U) March 28, 2012 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases

Summit Development Corp. v Hudson Meridian Constr. Group LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 31436(U) June 21, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

E-J Elec. Installation Co. v IBEX Contr., LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 33883(U) April 14, 2011 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2009

Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. v New Generation Transp NY Slip Op 30037(U) January 4, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016

Motta v Chelsea 25th St LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 30261(U) February 4, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2017 Judge: Kathryn E.

Iken-Murphy v Kling 2017 NY Slip Op 31898(U) September 6, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Manuel J.

Threadstone Advisors, LLC v Success Apparel Inc NY Slip Op 30212(U) January 31, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /13

American Express Bank. FSB v Thompson 2018 NY Slip Op 33162(U) December 3, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge:

Cohan v Movtady 2012 NY Slip Op 33256(U) January 24, 2012 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 2845/11 Judge: Denise L. Sher Cases posted with a

Ferreyr v Soros 2014 NY Slip Op 30859(U) April 2, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: Debra A. James Cases posted with a

Whitnum v Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, P.C NY Slip Op 33856(U) March 7, 2012 Supreme Court, Westchester County Docket Number: 19222/09

Matter of Johnson v A.O. Smith Water Prods NY Slip Op 32698(U) October 19, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012

Dweck v MEC Enters. LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 31659(U) August 31, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2014 Judge: Barry Ostrager

Rothlein v American Intl. Indus NY Slip Op 30036(U) January 7, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Manuel J.

Matter of Bethpage Fed. Credit Union v John 2011 NY Slip Op 31652(U) April 19, 2011 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 20089/10 Judge:

NRT N.Y., LLC v Morin 2014 NY Slip Op 31261(U) May 14, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Eileen A.

HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Merrill Lynch Mtge. Lending, Inc NY Slip Op 32257(U) November 3, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

McGraw-Hill Global Educ. Holdings, LLC v NetWork Group, LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 30004(U) January 3, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hamilton LLP v Strenger 2015 NY Slip Op 30696(U) April 28, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2014

Titan Atlas Mfg., Inc. v Meier 2013 NY Slip Op 31486(U) July 8, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Eileen A.

Diaz v City of New York 2017 NY Slip Op 30529(U) February 10, 2017 Supreme Court, Richmond County Docket Number: /14 Judge: Thomas P.

Human Care Servs. for Families & Children, Inc. v Lustig 2015 NY Slip Op 32603(U) March 5, 2015 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: /14

Federal Hous. Fin. Agency v UBS Real Estate Sec., Inc NY Slip Op 31458(U) July 27, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /12

Perry v Brinks, Inc NY Slip Op 30119(U) January 14, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2018 Judge: Adam Silvera Cases

M. Slavin & Sons, LTD v Penny Port, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32054(U) August 29, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge:

Reed v Yankowitz 2014 NY Slip Op 32843(U) October 29, 2014 Sup Ct, Kings County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: David I. Schmidt Cases posted with

Worth Constr. Co., Inc. v Cassidy Excavating, Inc NY Slip Op 33017(U) January 10, 2014 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 61224/2012

Bank of N.Y. Mellon v Arthur 2013 NY Slip Op 32625(U) October 23, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: Cynthia S.

ABKCO Music & Records, Inc. v Montague 2006 NY Slip Op 30726(U) April 15, 2006 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /05 Judge: Emily

Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Stevens 2016 NY Slip Op 32404(U) December 7, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2008 Judge:

Ostro v Ostro 2019 NY Slip Op 30174(U) January 18, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Andrew Borrok Cases posted

Troy v Carolyn D. Slawski, C.P.A., P.C NY Slip Op 30476(U) February 28, 2011 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Judge:

Vera v Tishman Interiors Corp NY Slip Op 31724(U) September 16, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Robert D.

KH 48 LLC v Muniak 2015 NY Slip Op 32330(U) December 7, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Joan A.

Tri State Consumer Ins. Co. v High Point Prop. & Cas. Co NY Slip Op 33786(U) June 16, 2014 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number:

Ehrlich v Department of Educ. of the City of N.Y NY Slip Op 32875(U) November 7, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge:

Merchant Cash & Capital, LLC v M.B. Auto Body, Inc NY Slip Op 31685(U) August 31, 2016 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: /2015

Creative Trucking, Inc. v BQE Ind., Inc NY Slip Op 32798(U) October 29, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Anil C.

McCormick v City of New York 2014 NY Slip Op 30255(U) January 28, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2005 Judge: Kathryn E.

Ibonic Holdings, LLC. v Vessix, Inc NY Slip Op 33215(U) December 11, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2017 Judge:

Platinum Rapid Funding Group Ltd. v VIP Limousine Servs., Inc NY Slip Op 31591(U) June 8, 2016 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number:

Ling v Kemper Independence Co NY Slip Op 30231(U) February 10, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2014 Judge: Eileen A.

Matter of Bauer v Board of Mgrs. of the Beekman Regent Condominium 2010 NY Slip Op 31668(U) June 28, 2010 Supreme Court, New York County Docket

Stillman v LHLM Group Corp NY Slip Op 33032(U) December 3, 2013 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: Judge: George J.

730 W. 183rd St. LLC v Noureddine 2013 NY Slip Op 32298(U) September 20, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Debra

Kaufman v Tratner, Molloy & Goodstein, LLP 2018 NY Slip Op 33121(U) November 26, 2018 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: /17 Judge:

Woodward v Millbrook Ventures LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30075(U) January 10, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen

Southern Advanced Materials, LLC v Abrams 2019 NY Slip Op 30041(U) January 4, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge:

Schneider v Liberty Mut. Ins. Co NY Slip Op 30015(U) January 5, 2011 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: Judge: Judith J.

Palma v MetroPCS Wireless, Inc NY Slip Op 33256(U) December 9, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /14 Judge: Cynthia S.

Atlas Union Corp. v 46 E. 82nd St. LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 33394(U) December 26, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2017 Judge:

FILED: BRONX COUNTY CLERK 11/22/ :25 AM INDEX NO /2016E

Spencer v City of New York 2015 NY Slip Op 32108(U) April 30, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2009 Judge: Kathryn E.

Vasomedical, Inc. v Barron NY Slip Op 51015(U) Decided on June 30, Supreme Court, Nassau County. Destefano, J.

Borden v 400 E. 55th St. Assoc. L.P NY Slip Op 33712(U) April 11, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Judith J.

Merrill Lynch Bus. v Trataros Constr. Inc NY Slip Op 30370(U) May 28, 2004 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2003 Judge:

Board of Directors of the 340 E. 93 St. Corp v Acevedo 2019 NY Slip Op 30023(U) January 4, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Rybolovleva v Rybolovleva 2014 NY Slip Op 33634(U) September 18, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Milton A.

Baturone v Gracie Square Hosp NY Slip Op 33433(U) September 26, 2012 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Anil C.

Transcription:

MBA ns. Corp. v Residential Funding Co., LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 34229(U) May 9, 2011 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 603552/2008 Judge: Bernard J. Fried Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various state and local government websites. These include the New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service, and the Bronx County Clerk's office. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication.

[* FLED: 1] NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/10/2011 NDEX NO. 603552/2008 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 115 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/10/2011 - UJ -z 0 w UJ (.) _w < - 0:::: UJ (!) ::::> z.., - 0 ;: - 0 c...j w...j o::::o 0:::: u. WW u. :c w l- o:::: 0:::: >- 0...Ju....J ::::> u. 1- (.) w a. UJ w 0:::: UJ w UJ < (.) -z 0 i== 0 :!: SUPREME COURT OF.,.THE STATE OF NEW YORK -. 1, NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: BERN.,. FRED e -FLE PART 60 HON. BERNARD J. F., MBA nsurance Corp., Residential Funding Co., LLC,. v. Plaintiff, Defendant. u ll Justice The following papers, numbered Ho were read on this motion to/for ill Notice of Motion/ Order to Show Clause - Affidavits - Exhibits... E NDEX NO. 603552/2008 MOTON DATE MOTON SEQ. NO. 007 MOTON CAL. NO. PAPERS NUMBERED Answering Affidavits - Exhibits = Replying Affidavits ------'Jl:..:... D ill 1--- Cross-Motion: Yes u No With this mot! 1 ln, Motion Sequence 007, Plaintiff MBA nsurance Corp. ll (MBA) moves for an 0rder, pursuant to CPLR 3101 (a)(3), 3102(a), 3108, 3111, 3120, and 3122-a, dirjting the issuance of a Commission in each of certain specified d. b ll b d d d ;r, d JUns 1ct10ns to o tam or issue su poenas uces tecum an a test1;an um requmng the production of d!lcuments and, where necessary, testimony regarding the employment status Jl1 income of certain Mortgage Borrowers who are or were employees of those JLiness entities to whom the subpoenas are addressed (the Employers). have J[d the papers submitted regarding this motion and heard oral argument. For the re~sons set forth below, Plaintiffs motion is granted and the ll attached Order is hereoy entered. Defendant RJLential Funding Co., LLC (RFC) opposes this motion on the principal grounds, injl alia, that the Commissions sought are unduly burdensome to obtain and execute l[nd that they are unnecessarily broad in scope. Neither 1

[* 2] argument is persuasive. Regarding the burden argument, because MBA will bear the burden of obtainij~ and executing the Commissions, with no effort required by RFC, so long as MBJldoes not object to incurring the burden, there is no basis upon which to allow RFC J[ object to it doing so. That MBA will share the discovery produced in response ~b its subpoenas with RFC and that RFC will chose to review t h is. d' 1scovery d oes not ll h ave any e r,.. 1ect on t h' is propos1t10n. Neither am c~nvinced by RFC's argument that the Commissions sought are broader than is necjlsary and seek certain discovery that may or may not be contained within the dtument production that RFC made to MBA. New York law is liberal in permittin~ parties to take discovery.. See Kavanaugh v. Ogden Allied ll Maintenance Corp., 92 NY2d 952, 954 ( 1998)( describing the scope of disclosure as "open and far-reachj~")(intemal citation omitted); Anonymous v. High Sch. for ll Envt '!. Studies, 32 AD3d 353, 358 (1st Dep't 2006) ("t is beyond cavil that New York has long favorj~ open and far-reaching pretrial discovery.") The standard for permissible discovejilunder this broad rule is relevance; discovery of any material that is relevant to the ~~estion( s) before the court will be permitted. See Hall v. 13 0-111 10 Food Corp., 254 AD2d 22, 22 (1st Dep't 1998) ("Disclosure should be permitted as long as the inforj[tion sought bears on the controversy and will assist in the ll preparation for trial")(intemal citation omitted). This case cojlms an alleged breach of five contracts for the provision of fi manc1a. l guaranty msurance. ll ( pertammg.. to fi 1ve separate mortgage-b ac k e d secunt1es.. ). ll. d. d... h h an d o f certam representations an warranties ma e m connection wit t ose contracts. There can 1t no question that the discovery that MBA seeks to obtain through the requestedl~ommissions - information regarding the employment status 2

[* 3] and incomes of RFCt Mortgage Borrower customers - is relevant to MBA's allegation that RFC JLached certain of those warranties and representations by neg l ectmg to ven "fy t hill ose B orrowers ' emp l oyment status an d mcomes,. m. v10. l atlon. of RFC's standard o~lrating procedures, with which MBA believed RFC had complied. RFC' s additio~al arguments, such as that MBA' s request for this information will give a negative i~pression of RFC's customers, the Mortgage Borrowers who are or were employeejlf the Employers to whom the subpoenas are directed, to their 11 respective employers, thereby damaging RFC's relationship with those customers, are also not compellijt Accordingly, it is ORDERED tli'at this motion is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED tliat Commissions sought shall issue in accordance with the attached Order. oated: --~- _;_r_r_/_iv_r_1_ SC J... Check one: D FNAL DSPOSTON l3' 8~f~1'f 1SWrED Check if appropriat~: ~ DO NOT POST 0 REFERENCE 3

[* 4] PRESENT: At the AS Part 60 of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for the County of New York, on the_[_ day of ~,2011. Honorable Bernard J. Fried MBA NSURANCE CORPORATON, -against- Plaintiff, ndex No. 603552/2008 AS Part 60 (Fried, J.) RESDENTAL FUNDNG COMPANY, LLC, Defendant. JJ@6P Uii!8f ORDER DRECTNG SSUANCE OF COMMSSON Plaintiff MBA nsurance Corporation ("MBA") having moved this Court for an Order pursuant to Rules 310 (a)(3), 3102(a), 3108, 3111, 3120 and 3122-a of the Civil Practice Law and Rules (the "CPLR"), directing the issuance of a Commission (Exhibit to this Order) to duly authorized persons in the states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 2 to this Order to obtain or issue subpoenas duces tecum anq ad test(ficandum as designated by attorneys for MBA to employers in the respective states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 3 (including any amendments to said Exhibit) to this Order (the "Mortgage Borrower Employers") requiring each Mortgage Borrower Employer to{.produce and permit discovery of the documents and things in its possession, custody or contra) that are identified on Exhibit A to the form of subpoena duces tecum and ad test(ficandum attached as Exhibit 4 to this Order, and, if necessary, requiring Mortgage Borrower Employers designated by attorneys for MBA to submit to examination under oath either orally or by written questions, because all such Mortgage Borrowers Employers are located without the State of New York. Now, upon plaintiff MBA's motion, and upon all papers submitted and considered in connection with such motion and the pleadings and prior proceedings in the above-captioned

[* 5] litigation (the "Action") and upon argument before the Court on March 3, 2011, and it appearing that: (i) the production of documents by Mortgage Borrower Employers; (ii) the certification of business records by Mortgage Borrower Employers and, if necessary, (iii) the taking of Mortgage Borrower Employers' examinations under oath either orally or by written questions by such Custodian of Records or other qualified witnesses of the business records of Mortgage Borrower Employers will be relevant and necessary to this Action and are requested pursuant to discovery proceedings mandated by the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, it is hereby: ORDERED, that pursuant to CPLR 310 (a)(3), 3102(a), 3108, 3111, 3120 and 3122-a, a Commission (annexed as Exhibit to this Order) be issued in this Action to any duly authorized persons in the states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 2 to this Order who may issue subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum or who may apply to the appropriate judicial authority in the states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 2 hereto for the issuance of subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum in the form of Exhibit 4 to this Order, or as otherwise permitted or required by the local Jaws of the aforesaid states and jurisdictions, to enable MBA to obtain certain documents and, if necessary, testimony from the Mortgage Borrower Employers listed in Exhibit 3 to this Order designated by attorneys for-mba as witnesses in this Action, provided, however, that such subpoenas shall not be issued to those Mortgage Borrower Employers who satisfy any one of the following characteristics: (i) are located in the State of New York (because a Commission is not necessary for these Mortgage Borrower Employers and MBA may seek the requested information from New York Mortgage Borrower Employers pursuant to a subpoena issued in compliance with CPLR 2301 et seq.); (ii) whose name and address in the mortgage loan file is missing or incomplete and cannot otherwise be determined by MBA; (iii) are employers of wage-earning borrowers for which the mortgage loan file includes both (a) complete paystub(s) showing income (for both the applicable pay period and year-to-date) for the thirty days prior to the loan application date, and (b) complete W-2 form(s) for the entire requisite time period (because this is,

[* 6] 11 generally, one of the ways for Borrowers to qualify for a loan on the basis of such documentation pursuant to RFC's guidelines); or (iv) of borrowers who are non-wage earners, such as Borrowers who are selfemployed or on a fixed income (because they do not have employers from which employment and income information can be sought); and.further provided, that these exclusions shall be made without prejudice to MBA's right to seek a further order for discovery of such Mortgage Borrower Employers or of Borrowers. ORDERED, that all authorized persons appointed Commissioner obtain or issue subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum in the form annexed as Exhibit 4 to this Order, or separately as subpoenas duces tecum and subpoenas ad test(ficandum, or as otherwise permitted or required by the local laws of the states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 2 to this Order, to compel Mortgage Borrower Employers, as provided herein, designated by attorneys for MBA to produce the documents and information requested in the subpoenas duces tecum and, as to those Mortgage Borrower Employers served with subpoenas ad testificandum, to come before you or a duly authorized person who can administer oaths to be placed under oath and examined orally or by written questions concerning certain matters in controversy in this Action; and it is further ORDERED, that from time to time as available, attorneys for MBA may provide all such persons appointed Commissioner, and all parties to this Action, with corrected or updated addresses and other information for those Borrowers and Mortgage Borrower Employers listed on Exhibit 3 to this Order ("the New nformation") and that all such Commissioners who receive such New nformation shall then modify or reissue the subpoenas authorized by this Order and accompanying Commission to incorporate the New nformation; and it is further ORDERED, that all authorized persons appointed Commissioner request each Mortgage Borrower Employer served with a subpoena duces tecum to provide a Certification of Business Records in the form of Exhibit 5 to this Order, or in such other form as permitted or required by the local laws of the states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 2 to this Order; and it is further

[* 7].,, ORDERED, that all authorized persons appointed Commissioner provide each Mortgage Borrower Employer served with a subpoena duces tecum with a copy of the November 23, 2009 Amended Stipulation and Order for the Production and Exchange of Confidential nformation Order (Exhibit 6 to this Order); and it is further ORDERED, that MBA notify each Borrower, whose Mortgage Borrower Employer is being subpoenaed, by letter to his or her last known address, or as otherwise required by local state law, that a subpoena is being sent to his or her Mortgage Borrower Employer requiring production of the Borrower's pay stubs; W-2 and 1099 forms; salary, income, bonus and any other compensation records; and title, position, and job description; and it is further ORDERED, that all authorized persons appointed Commissioner do cause the documents and things produced by Mortgage Borrower Employers, together with the Certification of Business Records and, where applicable, the testimony of the witness once said testimony has been reduced to writing, subscribed by the witness and certified to be correct, and any exhibits produced and proven during the examination of the witness, to be sent to the attorneys for MBA who provided you with the Commission authorized by this Order; and it is further ORDERED, that said Commission shall, by the Clerk of this Court, be delivered to counsel for MBA, who are permitted to transmit said Commission to the appropriate duly authorized persons in the states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 2 to this Order. ENTER: HON. ~fret> Hon. Bernard J. Fried fj7/ut1

[* 8] SUPREME COURT OF THE STA TE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK MBA NSURANCE CORPORATON, -against- Plaintiff, ndex No. 603552/08 AS Part 60 (Fried, J.) RESDENTAL FUNDNG COMPANY, LLC, COMMSSON Defendant. THE PEOPLE OF THE STA TE OF NEW YORK To: ANY DULY AUTHORZED PERSON WHO MAY OBTAN OR SSUE SUBPOENAS DUCES TECUM AND AD TESTFCANDUM AND TO ANY DULY AUTHORZED PERSON WHO CAN ADMNSTER OATHS PURSUANT TO THE LAWS OF THE STATES AND JURSDCTONS LSTED ON EXHBT 2 TO THE ANNEXED ORDER GREETNGS: Upon motion by MBA nsur~nce Corporation ("MBA"), pursuant to Rules 310 (a)(3), 3 02(a), 3108, 311, 3 20 and 3122-a of the Civil Practice Law and Rules of the State of New York (the "CPLR"), for the issuance of this Commission, the movant having informed this Court that the employers identified on the list of employers for the states and jurisdictions ("Mortgage Borrower Employers") on Exhibit 3 (including any amendments to said Exhibit) to the annexed Order Directing ssuance of Commission dated, 2011 (the "Order"), and as modified by such Order, are located in or have actual places of business within said states and jurisdictions and do or may have documents and information relevant to the adjudication of the above-captioned litigation (the "Action") pending in our Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, between MBA and Residential Funding Company, LLC ("RFC"), and movant wishing for the issuance of subpoenas duces tecum and ad test(ficandum to compel the production by Mortgage Borrower Employers of certain documents

[* 9] r and, where necessary, to compel Mortgage Borrower Employers' examinations under oath orally or by written questions, KNOW YE, that we, with full faith in your prudence and competency, have appointed you Commissioner, and by these presents do authorize you, in accordance with the terms of the annexed Order, to do all things necessary and required to be done by the Order, including, without limitation: (i) issuing subpoenas duces tecum and ad test[ficandum or, where necessary, applying to the appropriate judicial authority in the states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 2 to the annexed Order for the issuance of subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum in the form of Exhibit 4 to the annexed Order, or separately as subpoenas duces tecum and ad testificandum, or as otherwise permitted or required by the local laws of the states and jurisdictions on Exhibit 2 of the annexed Order, to compel those nonparty Mortgage Borrower Employers, as provided in the Order, designated by MBA's attorneys to produce documents and things requested in the subpoenas duces tecum; (ii) providing each Mortgage Borrower Employer served with a subpoena duces tecum and ad testificandum a copy of the November 23, 2009 Amended Stipulation and Order for the Production and Exchange of Confidential nformation (Exhibit 6 to the annexed Order); (iii) requesting each Mortgage Borrower Employer to whom you issue a subpoena duces tecum and ad testificandum to complete a Certification of Business Records in the form of Exhibit 5 to the annexed Order, or as otherwise permitted or required by the local laws of the states and jurisdictions on Exhibit 2 to the annexed Order, and (iv) if necessary, directing those Mortgage Borrower Employers designated by MBA's attorneys as nonparty witnesses in the above-captioned Action to come before you or a duly authorized person who can administer oaths pursuant to the subpoenas for the purpose of being examined under oath orally or by written questions. WE REQUEST THAT YOU, at a certain time and place to be noticed by you, do cause those Mortgage Borrower Employers, as provided in the Order, designated by MBA' s attorneys to produce and permit discovery of the documents and things in their possession, -2-

[* 10] custody or control that are identified on Exhibit A to the subpoena duces tecum and ad testificandum (Exhibit 4 to the annexed Order) relating to the matter in controversy in the Action and that you provide to each Mortgage Borrower Employer designated by attorneys for MBA a copy of the November 23, 2009 Amended Stipulation and Order for the Production and Exchange of Confidential nformation (Exhibit 6 to the annexed Order), and that you request said Mortgage Borrower Employers to complete a Certification of Business Records in the form of Exhibit 5 to the annexed Order, or as otherwise permitted or required by the local laws of the states and jurisdictions listed on Exhibit 2 to the annexed Order, and, if necessary, at a certain time and place to be by you appointed, do cause those Mortgage Borrower Employers designated by attorneys from MBA to come before you or a duly authorized person who can administer oaths to be then and there placed under oath and examined orally or by written questions concerning certain matters in controversy in the Action pending in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. WE FURTHER REQUEST THAT YOU, m accordance with the annexed Order, modify or reissue any subpoena authorized by this Commission so as to incorporate any New nformation (as defined in the annexed Order) pertaining to the Borrowers and Mortgage Borrower Employers listed on Exhibit 3 to the annexed Order. WE FURTHER REQUEST THAT YOU, with all convenient speed, do cause the documents and things produced by the designated Mortgage Borrower Employers, together with the Certification of Business Records and, where applicable, the testimony of the witness, once said testimony has been reduced to writing, subscribed by the witness and certified to be correct, and any exhibits produced and proven during the examination of the witness, be returned to t~e attorneys for MBA who provided you with this Commission. -3-

[* 11] WTNESS, the Honorable Bernard J. Fried, a duly authorized officer of our Supreme Court, this f_ day of ~ '2011. HON.~RED Hon. Bernar. ne -4-