Editor: David Reiss
Brooklyn Law School

March 2, 2013

Circuit Court of Arkansas Holds that MERS has Standing to Foreclose because Ownership of Note is not Required to have Standing

By Gloria Liu

In MERS, Inc. v. Stephanie Gabler, et al., (Circuit Court of Garland County # 2004-17-II), the court held MERS had standing to seek relief for its Writ of Assistance and is proper party to foreclose the mortgage because it was the mortgagee of record and holder of the promissory note. The borrowers claimed that MERS did not have standing because MERS was not the owner of the note but the court found that ownership of the note is not required to have standing.

| Permalink