REFinBlog

December 10, 2013

District Court Rejects Claims That MERS Lacked Standing

The court in deciding Pratt v. Bank of Am. NA, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151671 (D. Me. 2013) granted Bank of America’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff alleged that the existence of forged documents related to a mortgage loan and that … Continue reading →

Lower Court’s Grant of Summary Judgement Affirmed by Nevada Court

The court in deciding Castro v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 2013 Nev. LEXIS 1602 (Nev. 2013) affirmed the lower courts judgment against the plaintiff. Plaintiff obtained a home loan from Decision One Mortgage Company, LLC and executed a promissory note … Continue reading →

Ohio Court Finds That Plaintiffs Were Not Bona Fide Purchasers

The Court of Appeals of Ohio, Fifth Appellate District, in deciding Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Casey, 2013-Ohio-4686 (Ohio Ct. App., Fairfield County Oct. 21, 2013) affirmed the lower court’s judgment and held that the plaintiffs were not bona fide … Continue reading →

December 9, 2013

North Carolina Court Dismisses Plaintiff’s Claims of Fraud Against MERS, Bank of America, & Trustee Services of Carolina

The court in deciding Porterfield v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, Nat’l Ass’n, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152318 (E.D.N.C. 2013) dismissed plaintiff’s claims and granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff asserted the following claims: (1) wrongful foreclosure; (2) fraud; (3) … Continue reading →

December 4, 2013

Michigan Court Finds All Six of Plaintiff’s Claims Without Merit

The court in deciding McGlade v. Bank of Am., N.A., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152610 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 24, 2013) granted defendant Bank of America, N.A.’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiff, McGlade brought six causes of action: Count I-Fraudulent Misrepresentation; Count … Continue reading →

Tennessee Court Grants Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment as Wells Fargo Had Ownership Interest in the Note & Deed

The court in deciding McKee v. Am. Brokers Conduit, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152657 (W.D. Tenn. 2013) granted Wells Fargo’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs claimed that (1) Wells Fargo didn’t have lawful ownership or a security interest in the … Continue reading →

Michigan Court Finds Plaintiff’s Claim that Foreclosure Proceedings Violated Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 600.3204(1) and (3) Unpersuasive

The court in deciding Anderson v. Bank of Am., N.A., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152765 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 24, 2013) dismissed plaintiff’s claims that foreclosure violated Michigan state law. Plaintiff sought a declaratory judgment that foreclosure proceedings violated Mich. Comp. … Continue reading →