FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Jason Lobo
“The agreed upon measures are consistent with steps we’ve taken nationally to improve offerings to our constituencies and are natural outcomes of our responsiveness to the rapidly changing market-reform environment.”
“‘Butler’s insistence on re-litigating losing arguments is staggering, and it comes with a cost, because it multiplies the expense of litigation and monopolizes scarce judicial resources,’ Judge Montgomery wrote. ‘Moreover, no one, not even Butler, can reasonably or competently believe in the merits of any of these arguments. Butler’s persistent filing of frivolous arguments is egregious and merits sanctions…’”
Notable State and Federal Court Decisions
“In Buchna, Judge Mary H. Murguia of the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona granted MERS’ motion to dismiss finding that MERS is a valid beneficiary under Arizona law with the authority to enforce the Deed of Trust.”
“Not only has the notion that MERS doesn’t have authority to assign been routinely rejected as baseless by courts, including multiple courts in the California system, it’s also an ineffective strategy for avoiding foreclosure after default.”
“In a decision filed last month, Dehdashti v. The Bank of New York Mellon, Judge Batten agreed with MERS that the plaintiff lacked ‘standing to challenge the validity of the assignment because she was not a party to the assignment.’”
“All other claims were similarly dismissed for lack of merit, including allegations that MERS has no authority under Idaho law to assign its interest in the Deed of Trust. ‘This position has been routinely rejected by the courts, including this Court,’ Judge Winmill wrote.”
“District Judge Darren B. Simpson of the Bonneville County District Court in Idaho denied the borrowers’ attempt to use the judicial system as a ‘fishing expedition in search of flaws in the Trust Deed or the Note,’ while at the same time upholding and explaining in detail MERS’ role and authority as trust deed beneficiary.”
“In Hargrow v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A., the Sixth Circuit panel rejected the plaintiffs’ claims that, among other things, Wells Fargo, as an assignee of MERS, was not entitled to foreclose because it did not own an interest in the indebtedness…”
“We disagree with today’s ruling from the Oregon Court of Appeals’ in Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, et al. Importantly, however, we note that the Appellate decision does not impact judicial foreclosures. Nor does it affect the validity of mortgages or deeds of trust recorded in MERS’ name in Oregon.”
“Citing previous decisions in Kriegel v. MERS, Breggia v. MERS, and Payette v. MERS, Justice Rubine ruled instead that MERS is a valid mortgagee under Rhode Island law with the authority to act on behalf of the current note owners, including assigning and/or foreclosing the mortgages MERS holds as mortgagee on the properties.”
“‘The Tadeharas’ interpretation of § 57-1-35 was squarely rejected by the Utah Court of Appeals in Commonwealth Property Advocates...,’ Circuit Judge Murphy wrote on behalf of the panel.”
For descriptions of cases and other materials pertaining to MERS’ business model and role in U.S. housing, please visit www.mersinc.org.
MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. is a privately held corporation that owns and manages the MERS® System and all other MERS® products. It is a member-based organization made up of thousands of lenders, servicers, sub-servicers, investors and government institutions. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) serves as the mortgagee in the land records for loans registered on the MERS® System, and is a nominee (or agent) for the owner of the promissory note. The MERS® System is a national electronic database that tracks changes in mortgage servicing and beneficial ownership interests in residential mortgage loans on behalf of its members.