REFinBlog

March 14, 2013

Michigan District Court Grants MERS’s Motion for Summary Judgment because, as Mortgagee, MERS had Standing To Foreclose

In Corgan v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., No. 1:09-cv-939, 2010 WL 2854421 (W.D. Mich. July 20, 2010), the District Court granted MERS’s motion for summary judgment because MERS had the right to foreclosure as “Mortgagee” pursuant to the mortgage … Continue reading →

In Cooke v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., et al., CA No. PC 2011-3487 (R.I. Sup. August 29, 2012), the plaintiff alleged that the assignment of the mortgage interest from MERS to the Federal National Mortgage Association, FNMA, was invalid. … Continue reading →

March 13, 2013

Texas Court of Appeals Holds that Foreclosure Proceedings Do Not Require Production of the Original Note

In Hornbuckle v Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.,  No. 02-09-00330-CV (TX Ct. App. 2, May. 19, 2011), the court affirmed a lower court decision allowing judicial foreclosure. The homeowners purchased home by obtaining an FHA loan from Principal Residential Mortgage, Inc. … Continue reading →

U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Holds that Lenders Still Entitled to Repayment of Loans Even If MERS is Not a Beneficiary

In Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.,  No. 09–17364 (U.S. 9th Cir. 2011), there was a putative class action challenging origination and foreclosure procedures for home loans maintained within the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS). In their complaint, the plaintiffs … Continue reading →

California Court of Appeals Holds that MERS and its Assignee have Standing to Foreclosure Without Holding Original Promissory Note

In Ferguson v Avelo Mortgage, LLC.,195 CA 4th 1618 (2011), the court held that MERS and its valid assignee, Avelo, had authority to initiate foreclosure proceedings and invoke the tender rule against Tenants, even when neither held the original promissory note. … Continue reading →

March 12, 2013

Ohio Court of Appeals Holds that Execution of Mortgage Assignment is Sufficient to be a Real Party in Interest

In BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P. v. Hall, 2010-Ohio-3472 (Ohio Ct. App. 2010), the Ohio Court of Appeals reviewed the sole question of whether the bank in this case had standing to foreclose. The homeowners argued that the bank “was … Continue reading →

March 11, 2013

Plaintiff Homeowner’s Complaint and Temporary Restraining Order to Halt Foreclosure Sale Dismissed for Lacking Articulated Legal Claim and Vagueness

In Sakala v BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, CV 10-00578 DAE-LEK, 2011 WL 719482 [D Haw Feb. 22, 2011], Plaintiff Steven J. Sakala filed a pro se complaint and a motion to stay foreclosure against Defendants BAC Home Loan Servicing … Continue reading →