In Travis County, a large Texas county with Austin (my alma mater) serving as the county seat, the County Clerk derided a recent MERS-related decision of the notoriously “conservative” (really meaning bank-oligarchy-friendly rather than some more benign definition of fiscal conservatism) U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Harris County v. MERSCorp Incorporated. The Clerk […]
A new one from Massachusetts, a non-judicial foreclosure (like Arizona) case regarding paragraph 22 of the Deed of Trust contract, and the conditions precedent set forth therein:Pinti v Emigrant Mortg Co Inc Choice bits: Insofar as the plaintiffs’ mortgage is concerned, paragraph 22 begins by requiring notice of default to be given prior to any acceleration […]
Harvard Amicus Brief on MERS Some of the best quotes, Mortgage servicing companies, banks, courts and government agencies have all expressed astonishment at the extent to which MERS database is inaccurate. (p. 24) “Simply put, ‘MERS is the Wikipedia of land registration systems.’ Culhane v. Aurora Loan Services, 826 F. Supp. 2d 352 (D. Mass. 2011) […]
Montana reverses the trial court’s summary judgment for MERS, discussing whether MERS meets the statute’s definition of beneficiary as a matter of law: We find that the definition of “beneficiary” is clear and unambiguous. The section lends itself to only one interpretation, namely that the beneficiary is “the person named . . . in a […]
Here’s an excerpt of a great summary of the Niday case, from HouseKeeping Report. Go to the site and read the whole thing; it is worth your time: Niday Gets Interesting Up to this point, the opinion is little more than a recap of Brandrup. The court makes simple work of showing that MERS is […]
Here’s a great analysis by Housekeeping Report on Brandrup v. ReconTrust Company, N.A. Again, Arizonans should note that our statute has the same definition of beneficiary as the Oregon statute discussed in Brandrup.
We linked the oral argument to this case in the past. The Washington Supreme Court answered the following certified questions: Opinion: Bain v MERS IndyMac WA S Ct CERTIFIED QUESTIONS 1. Is Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., a lawful “beneficiary” within the terms of Washington’s Deed of Trust Act, Revised Code of Washington section 61.24.005(2), if […]