September 19, 2013
Court Holds That California State Law Did Not Require Possession of the Note to Commence a Non-Judicial Foreclosure
The court in Chilton v. Federal National Mortgage Association, No. 1:09-cv-02187-OWW-SKO (2010), held that California state law did not necessitate possession of the promissory note in order to proceed with a non-judicial foreclosure.
The court dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint, after hearing the plaintiff’s arguments alleging wrongful foreclosure and lack of standing. Even though MERS was not named as a party to the action, the plaintiff argued that based on recent Kansas case law, MERS did not have standing to foreclose since the note and deed of trust had been separated.
The court distinguished Kansas’s recent precedent from this case in that the court held that Kansas’s case law did not consider the requirements of California’s non-judicial foreclosure process.
| Permalink
