With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". was made payable to Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. and does not contain an endorsement. At trial, BAC offered the original note, which contained an undated blank endorsement. BAC’s witness, an employee of Bank of America, did not know when the endorsement was made. On appeal, BAC argues that the original note established its standing to foreclose. Although BAC may have established its standing at the time of trial by filing the original note endorsed in blank, it did not establish its standing at inception of the suit. By now it should be understood that a plaintiffs standing at inception of the suit is not established by filing the note with an undated endorsement after the complaint has been filed. See Matthews v. Fed. Nat’l Mortg. Ass’n, 160 So.3d 131, 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (<HOLDING>); Focht v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 124 So.3d

A: holding that when the basis of the earlier suit was that the plaintiff had had defaulted on a promissory note and the claim in the instant action is whether that promissory note was valid the transaction test is met
B: holding that where a promissory note had never been made payable to plaintiff or to bearer nor had it ever been indorsed to plaintiff    defendants established that plaintiff was not the owner or holder of the note
C: holding that standing at inception of the suit was not established where the note attached to the complaint was not made payable to the plaintiff and contained no endorsement even though the original note endorsed in blank was introduced at trial
D: holding that because a mortgage provides the security for the repayment of the note the person having standing to foreclose a note secured by a mortgage may be either the holder of the note or a nonholder in possession of the note who has the rights of a holder
C.