POINT VII
                               ---------

        CAN A LETTER WRITTEN TO THE COURT REQUESTING IT TO CHANGE AND
        DISTURB MAJOR HOLDINGS AND FINDINGS OF FACTS OF A PRIOR DECISION
        AND ORDER RISE TO THE LEVEL OF IT BEING A MOTION ?
        Yes:

            The letter faxed directly to Lower Court chambers was
        treated as a motion that the Court granted, and became an
        integral part of the Court's thinking and later decision, and
        was the basis upon the Court signing the final Judgement for
        Foreclosure and Sale (A - 7) being appealed in toto herein.


            On August 20, 2007, one of Plaintiff-Respondent's legal
        assistants, Sherri Beals faxed a letter to Lower Court Chambers
        (A - 281) that contained the following request:

            "Therefore, enclosed for your Honor's review is a
            proposed Amended Order correcting the above-mentioned
            error.  We respectifully request that Your Honor review
            tha Amended Order and, if it meets with your approval,
            that you execute the same and return a copy to this
            office in the enclosed postage paid envelope."

            Plaintiff-Respondent's carefully reworded Amended Decision
        and Order (A - 19) totally changed the following holdings from
        the Original Decision and Order dated April 27, 2007 (A - 25) ,
        by completely eliminating the following paragraphs and wording:

            "Defendants allege the $162,000 was satisfied and not
            in default.  They are correct.

            "The Bank acknowledges Loan #4061738 in the original
            sum of $162,000 was satisfied..."

            "On or about May 16, 2005 Defendants borrowed $380,346.31
            from Wells Fargo Bank N.A.  They also obtained an equity
            loan in the sum of $150,000 which was consolidated with
            the $380,346.31.  The total consolidated loan was
            $522,200"

            The legal definition of a motion according to the common
        understanding and custom, and according to law dictionary
        definition:

            "MOTION - an application to the court requesting an order
            or rule in favor of the applicant.  See 347 S.W. 2d 211
            216.  Motions are generally made in reference to a pending
            action and may be addressed to a matter within the
            descretion of the judge, or may concern a point of law...
            Motions may be made orally, or more formaily, in writing
            by NOTICE OF MOTION."

            The Beals letter faxed to Judge O'Rourke (A - 281) was
        clearly a motion that went so far that it even changed the
        finding of facts already decided, and was not just her opinion
        when she stated that the original Decision and Order
        "...contained an error...".  The request to drop the above
        findings was a motion.

            Siegal makes it clear for Section 243 Motion Practice,
        Generally "A motion is an application for an order."  This was
        precisely what the Beals faxed letter was, an application for an
        order to replace the Original Decision and Order with
        Plaintiff-Respondent's own version.

            This Court should declare that the Beals letter faxed to the
        Lower Court was in fact a motion which was not properly filed or
        noticed, and void and vacate the Amended Decision and Order that
        was granted by it.