Lenders who purchase mortgage loans after a prior lender loses the note face significant challenges to foreclosing under the commonly accepted practice in Massachusetts. Harmonizing existing Massachusetts Supreme Court precedent with the state UCC may offer a solution.
Posts published in “Foreclosure”
The Supreme Court of Ohio recently affirmed the dismissal of a borrower’s complaint for a writ of mandamus and a writ of prohibition filed against the successor to trial court judges who presided over a foreclosure action in which judgment was entered against the borrower.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a borrower’s petition seeking relief under the federal All Writs Act for purported violations of the automatic bankruptcy stay in continued foreclosure proceedings and purported violations of the borrower’s rights to remove the state court proceedings to the bankruptcy court.
The Oregon Supreme Court recently held that a lien for delinquent condominium assessments has priority over a first mortgage or deed of trust, where the mortgagee fails to initiate a foreclosure action within the 90-day notice period prescribed by ORS § 100.450(7).
The New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, recently held that (1) a notice of default sent before a foreclosure did not accelerate the mortgage debt for statute of limitation purposes; and (2) in most circumstances, a lender decelerates mortgage debt when it voluntarily dismisses a foreclosure complaint.
The Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District, recently affirmed a trial court order dismissing a borrower's attempt to vacate a default foreclosure judgment as untimely because the borrower's first attempt to undo the foreclosure, which was withdrawn without prejudice, did not toll the time to file the petition within 60 days from the borrower's first appearance in the case.
In a per curiam ruling, the Supreme Court of Texas recently held that the holder of a deed of trust was entitled to foreclose through equitable subrogation, even after it had failed to timely foreclose on its deed of trust.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently held a "hybrid notice" related to foreclosure was neither inaccurate nor deceptive where the notice included overlapping reinstatement periods required by both the mortgage instrument and state statute.
The Court of Appeals of Illinois, First District, recently held that a homeowner’s attempt to vacate a foreclosure sale was barred by the Illinois foreclosure statute where title to the property had vested by deed to a third party.
The Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, recently affirmed a trial court order confirming the sale of a foreclosed property, holding that a public notice of sale stating that the property contained a “single family residence” complied with the Illinois Foreclosure Law’s requirement to sufficiently describe “improvements on the real estate.”
The Texas Supreme Court recently held that a claim made by a bankruptcy trustee did not fall within a special warranty clause that limited the grantor’s liability to claims asserted by individuals "by, through and under" the grantor.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that two plaintiff consumers failed to state a claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) because the plaintiffs did not allege that they reported the alleged errors to a consumer credit reporting agency or that any such agency notified them of the alleged errors; and there is no private right of action arising from a direct dispute of credit reporting with only the furnisher.