About Rafe Serouya

Rafe is a second year student at Brooklyn Law School, graduating in May 2014 with a Real Estate Law Certificate. Rafe received his B.S. from Rutgers University, Rutgers Business School with a major in Finance and minor in Music. He has interned with the New York State Office of the Attorney General in the Real Estate Finance Bureau, and is currently interning at the Brooklyn Law School Corporate and Real Estate Clinic.

Federal District Court in Idaho Rules for Bank, MERS, et al., Regarding Quiet Title Dispute

In Gilbert v. Bank of America N.A., No. 1:11-cv-00272-BLW (D. Idaho Sept. 15, 2011), the Idaho District Court granted defendant banks’ motion to dismiss, explaining that the plaintiff homeowner cannot bring a quiet title action without first tendering payment on their debt obligation. The Court further held that even if they agreed with homeowner’s argument that ReconTrust lacked legal authority to execute the notice of default due to improper appointment by Bank of America, the tender is a necessary prerequisite to their claim.

Idaho Supreme Court Rules for Bank, MERS, et al., Regarding Foreclosure Proceedings under Deed of Trust

In Trotter v. Bank of New York Mellon, 152 Idaho 842, 275 P.3d 857 (2012), holding for the defendant bank, the Supreme Court of Idaho held that under the Idaho Deed of Trust Act, the foreclosure process is a non-judicial proceeding, and therefore, a trustee may initiate a foreclosure proceeding on a deed of trust without first proving ownership of the underlying note or demonstrating that the deed of trust beneficiary has requested or authorized the trustee to initiate those proceedings. The bank had acquired the note and the mortgage prior to initiating the foreclosure. The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the homeowner’s request for a stay of action.

Idaho District Court Rules for Homeowner in Foreclosure Dispute under Deed of Trust

In Ralph v. MetLife, No. CV 2010-0200 (D. Idaho Aug. 10, 2011), in granting partial summary judgment for the plaintiff homeowner, the court found that the defendant bank lacked authority to maintain a non-judicial foreclosure since MERS did not have a beneficial interest in the deed of trust to rightfully transfer to the defendant. Since defendant was incapable of initiating a non-judicial foreclosure, they are incapable of complying with I.C. 45-1505, the statute governing trust deed foreclosures.