Division One of the Arizona Court of Appeals recently shot down yet another attempt by a homeowner upside down in his property to avoid foreclosure.  In Waltner v J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, the trial court dismissed the homeowner’s suit as yet another “show me the note” attempt to enjoin a trustee’s sale.  In bygone years the holder of a promissory note was required to be able to produce the original note at the trial of a judicial foreclosure because there was always a possibility that the holder of the note had assigned it to someone else and had no further interest in it.  Such a requirement in today’s world would apparently be “inconvenient” for the banks who more often than not are assigning the interests in such notes en masse over and over, ‘and where it stops nobody knows’. The Court of Appeals ruled that there is no such requirement at all to hold a trustee’s sale.  Presumably, if the homeowner could prove that someone other than the purported beneficiary of the deed of trust was the actual owner of the note and deed of trust, the Courts might grant some relief.  As it is, the Courts appear to consider the fact that the homeowner acknowledges he has missed his payments so it only makes sense that this would come to the attention of the entity which has the right to receive the payments and they would commence a foreclosure.  As long as the legislature is happy with these interpretations, they will continue.  The legislature could change such requirements very easily and require the beneficiary of a deed of trust to produce the original note upon demand by the trustor.  Not likely to happen.