REFinBlog

August 20, 2013

Arizona Court Holds That MERS is the Beneficiary With the Authority to Foreclose

The court in Ciardi v. The Lending Company, Inc. et al., 2010 WL 2079735 (D. Ariz. 2010) held that that MERS is the beneficiary with the authority to foreclose. In doing so the court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss … Continue reading →

MERS’ Assignments are Recognized as Valid as New York Appellate Court Overturns ‘N.Y. v. Alderazi’ & ‘LaSalle v. Lamy’

In the case of Bank of New York v. Eddie Sachar, et al., 95 A.D.3d 695 (2012), the court found the Bank of New York Mellon had standing to foreclose based on a MERS assignment and the delivery of the … Continue reading →

August 8, 2013

Bankruptcy Court Rules MERS Has Standing and the Customary Rights of a Mortgagee Under a Mass. Mortgage and May Act Under the Mortgage

The Massachusetts bankruptcy court hearing In re Sonya D. Huggins f/k/a SONYA D. HICKS, Debtor Chapter 13, Case No. 05-18826-RS overruled the Huggins’ objection to the standing of the nominee to seek relief from the automatic stay and ordered an … Continue reading →

August 2, 2013

Borden and Reiss on Show Me The Note!

Brad and I were e-interviewed by the Knowledge Effect, a Thomson Reuters blog on our recent article (co-authored with KeAupuni Akina), Show Me The Note!.  The interview is below: Westlaw Journals: Your commentary is about the success of the “show … Continue reading →

August 1, 2013

Arkansas Court Rules That MERS Did Not Violate the State’s Statutory Foreclosure Act

The court in Coley et al v. Accredited Home Lenders Inc et al (E.D. Ark. 2011) dismissed the homeowner-plaintiff’s claims against MERS pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). In granting MERS’ motion to dismiss the court considered, then … Continue reading →

July 30, 2013

Michigan District Court Holds That MERS Cannot Foreclose by Advertisement But Can Assign its Security Interest

In Knox v. Trott & Trott, No. 10-13175, Dist. Court, (Michigan 2011) the court denied the plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration under Rule 60(b)(3) and (4). Knox maintained that the court erred in rejecting his argument that the defendants lacked standing under … Continue reading →

July 25, 2013

MERS Has Standing to Bring Foreclosure Action as Court Ruled There Was No Question That the Defendant-Homeowner Was the Correctly Named Party

In the case of Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v. Ventura, No. CV 054003168S, 2006 WL 1230265 (Conn. Super. Ct. April 20, 2006) the plaintiff-lender moved for summary judgment against defendants, a husband and wife, as to liability only. After review of … Continue reading →