February 5, 2013
Pennsylvania Bankruptcy Court Holds that Mortgage Servicer Lacks Standing to Make a Motion for Relief from Stay Placed on Mortgaged Property in a Bankruptcy Proceeding
In In re Michelin Alcide, 450 B.R. 526 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2011), the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that the mortgage loan servicer did not have standing to make a motion for relief from … Continue reading
February 5, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
California Court of Appeal Upheld Beneficiary’s Demurrer to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint
In Arnolds Mgmt. Corp. v. Eischen, 158 Cal. App. 3d 575, 205 Cal. Rptr. 15 (Ct. App. 1984), the California Second District Court of Appeal held that before Arnolds Management Corporation (AMC) could set aside a non-judicial foreclosure under a … Continue reading
February 5, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
United States District Court in California Holds that MERS “Assignee” Lacked Standing Because no Evidence Showed MERS held the Note
In Saxon Mortg. Services, Inc. v. Hillery, C-08-4357EMC, 2008 WL 5170180 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 9, 2008), the United States District Court, in the Northern District of California granted Hillery’s motion to dismiss because Saxon Mortgage Services, Inc., lacked standing. Hillery obtained … Continue reading
February 5, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
Court in Rhode Island Rejects the Disconnection Theory
In Payette v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, No. PC-2009-5875, 2011 WL 3794701 (R.I. Sup. August 22, 2011), the plaintiffs do not challenge the allegation they defaulted on the note, however they challenged both the foreclosure sale and the title acquired … Continue reading
February 5, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
Ohio Court of Appeals Holds that MERS, as Mortgagee, has Standing to Foreclose Despite Lacking a Beneficial Interest in the Note
In Mtge. Electronic Registration Sys., Inc., v. Mosley, 2010-Ohio-2886, the Court of Appeals of Ohio held that MERS had standing to foreclose on the homeowners. The court found that language in the mortgage naming MERS as nominee, as well as … Continue reading
February 5, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
February 4, 2013
Florida Court of Appeals Held that Bank Defendant had Standing to Bring Foreclosure Claim and Plaintiff’s Due Process Rights were Not Violated
In Harvey v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co., 69 So. 3d 300 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011), the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, held that Deutsche Bank had standing to bring a foreclosure action as holder of … Continue reading
February 4, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments
Florida Court of Appeal held that Loan Servicer Defendant was the Proper Holder of Promissory Note and Mortgage, and Granted Summary Judgment
In Riggs v. Aurora Loan Services, LLC, 36 So. 3d 932 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010), the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, held that Aurora Loan Services, LLC, was the lawful holder of a promissory note and … Continue reading
February 4, 2013 in Downstream litigation | Permalink | No Comments