REFinBlog

July 22, 2013

Washington Court Holds That the Language of the Security Instrument Gave MERS Both the Authority to Foreclose and Assign the Deed of Trust

The court Salmon v. Bank of America, MERS et al., No. 10-446 (D. Wash. May 25, 2011) dismissed claims against Bank of America and MERS. The plaintiffs argued that MERS was a “ghost-beneficiary” and as such could not be the … Continue reading →

July 21, 2013

Utah Court Holds That Under Utah Law, MERS Was Not Required to Identify the Note-Holder in Order to Permit the Trustee to Proceed With Foreclosure

The plaintiff in Nielsen v. Aegis Wholesale Corporation, MERS et al., No. 10-606 (D. Utah May 4, 2011) argued that MERS divided the deed of trust as well as the promissory note. The court, in reaching their decision and rejecting … Continue reading →

Oregon Court Rules That MERS’ Role as Beneficiary is Not Inconsistent With the Purpose of Oregon’s Non-Judicial Foreclosure Statute

The Oregon court in Nigro v. Northwest Trustee Services and Wells Fargo Bank, No. 11 CV 0135 (May 15, 2011) denied the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction to stop a non-judicial foreclosure sale. payday cash loans with no credit … Continue reading →

July 19, 2013

Bad Faith Remedies for Loan Modification Negotiations

New York Supreme Court Justice Torres (Bronx) issued a Decision and Order in Citibank, N.A. v. Barclay et al., No. 381649-09 (June 21, 2013), in which he evaluated what the appropriate remedies were for failing to negotiate in “good faith” … Continue reading →

July 16, 2013

Oregon Court Rejects Plaintiff’s Argument That the Trust Deed Can Only be Foreclosed if a Single Entity Holds Both the Note and Deed

After receiving a Notice of Default and Election to Sell, the plaintiff in Spencer v. Guaranty Bank et al., No. 10CV0515ST, Deschutes Co. Circuit (May 5, 2011) sought an injunction barring MERS, as well as the other defendants, from bringing … Continue reading →

Minnesota Court Holds MERS Foreclosure Valid, Although Signatories on the Assignment Were Officers of More Than One Entity

The court in deciding Ostigaard v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company et al., No. 0:10cv1557, (May 2, 2011) granted MERS as well as its codefendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice. The court heavily relied on the holding from … Continue reading →

Minnesota District Court Dismisses Plaintiff’s Fraud Claims and Holds That MERS Had Legal Title and Authority to Foreclose

The Minnesota District Court in Allen v. Wilford & Geske et al.,No. 70-CV-10-29502 (D. Minn. May 9, 2011), after hearing the plaintiff’s contentions, dismissed his complaint for foreclosure fraud. The court held that MERS had legal title and authority to … Continue reading →