James v Recontrust, Oregon District Court Says Noteholder is Beneficiary of Deed of Trust Not MERS

James v Recontrust et al – Order (2)This is an interesting decision. It construes Oregon’s deed of trust statutory definition of beneficiary, specifically a line that is exactly the same as Arizona’s definition of beneficiary (A.R.S. 33-801) as a designated party “for whose benefit a trust deed is given.”

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s