October 3, 2013
Washington Court Rejects Plaintiff’s Claims That MERS’ Assignment was Fraudulent
The Washington court in Bain v. Metropolitan Mortgage Group, Inc., 2010WL891585 (W.D. Wash. Dist. Ct., March2010), rejected the plaintiff’s contentions that an assignment by MERS was executed fraudulently. The plaintiff based his claims around the execution of a mortgage assignment … Continue reading
October 3, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
Texas Court Plaintiff’s Challenges the Authority of MERS to Assign its Lien Interest to a Successive Party
The Texas court in Eskridge v. Federal Home Loan Mortg. Corp., No. 6:10-CV-285, (W.D. Tex., 2011) dismissed Plaintiff’s claims to challenges the authority of MERS to assign its lien interest to a successive party. The plaintiff unsuccessfully argued that she … Continue reading
October 3, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
Ohio Court Dismisses Plaintiff’s Claim That Defendant Lacked Standing to Foreclose
The Ohio court in Turner v. Lerner, Sampson & Rothfuss, 776 F.Supp.2d 498 (2011) granted in part and denied in part the defendant’s motion to dismiss. The plaintiffs alleged that defendant [Lerner] engaged in the widespread practice of filing and … Continue reading
October 3, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
October 2, 2013
Southern District of California Bankruptcy Court Holds that MERS’ Role as Beneficiary Does Not Provide Protection Against Foreclosure Deficiencies
In In re Doble , BK 10-11296-MM13, 2011 WL 1465559 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. Apr. 14, 2011), the court held that MERS’ limited role as beneficiary of the deed of trust did not provide protection against foreclosure deficiencies. MERS’ role did … Continue reading
October 2, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
California Court of Appeals Holds that MERS has Authority to Assign Beneficial Interest
In Forbes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., E051309, 2011 WL 4985965 (Cal. Ct. App. Oct. 20, 2011), homeowner had acquired a single-family residence and later refinanced the property by obtaining two loans. Mortgage Funding, Inc. was the lender of both … Continue reading
October 2, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
California Court of Appeals holds that MERS Does Not Bear Burden of Proving Valid Assignment
In Fontenot v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A, No. A130478, 198 Cal.App.4th 256 (Ca. Ct. App. 1st Dist. Aug. 11, 2011), Fontenot sued Wells Fargo Bank, MERS and three other entities after she defaulted and lost the property to foreclosure. In the fourth amended complaint, … Continue reading
October 2, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
September 27, 2013
United States District Court Dismisses Plaintiff’s Contentions Against MERS, Alleging Wrongful Foreclosure and Unfair Business Practices
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California in deciding Pantoja v. Countrywide Home Loans, et al. 5:09cv016015 (N.D. Cal., 2009) affirmed MERS’ authority to foreclose. MERS’ ability to foreclose was again affirmed in this case, contrary … Continue reading
September 27, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments