FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: Jason Lobo
In Kullman v Northwest Trustee Services, Inc., Judge Leighton, citing the recent Bain v. Metropolitan Mortgage Group decision, found that the Washington Supreme Court “did not rule MERS involvement renders a foreclosure per se invalid.” Judge Leighton noted that the borrowers failed to prove that they were harmed by MERS’ role in the foreclosure and that the borrowers admitted that they defaulted on their mortgage. The Court found the plaintiffs’ claims against MERS sought to generate controversy through this action where none exists. The Court also found no merit to plaintiffs’ claims for fraud or violation of Washington’s CPA against MERS and the other defendants.
Notable State and Federal Court Decisions
“Addressing MERS’ authority under the security deed, Judge Hamil held that ‘…Georgia law is clear that, as nominee of the originating lender, MERS had the ability and legal authority to transfer and assign the Security Deed.’ He noted that ‘[a]t the time of the assignment, MERS had been designated to act in connection with the Security Deed, and pursuant to express terms of the Security Deed, MERS had the authority to assign the Security Deed.’”
“In its August 21, 2012, Order, the court granted the motion for sanctions because ‘[i]n spite of clear, binding precedent to the contrary,” Butler was continuing to assert the “consistently rejected ‘show me the note’ legal theory, along with similarly baseless quiet title and slander of title claims.’ This sanction is at least the sixth time Butler has been penalized for similar matters.”
“’This court has determined that MERS is a valid beneficiary of the deed of trust...’ Justice Saitta wrote. ‘MERS, in its capacity as the beneficiary of the deed of trust, was capable of assigning its own interest in the deed of trust and to appoint a substitute trustee.’”
“’We are pleased with Justice Giacomo’s ruling, which corrects the borrowers’ misinterpretation of the Silverberg decision and recognizes MERS’ role as mortgagee with the authority to assign the mortgage,’ MERSCORP Holdings Director of Communications, Jason Lobo, said.”
Other Relevant Cases
• California – Muhumuza v. Suntrust Mortgage, Inc. – Judgment for the Defendant
• Georgia – Jenkins v. McCalla Raymer – Judgment for the Defendant
• Georgia – Kabir v. Statebridge Company – Judgment for the Defendant
• Hawaii – MERS v. Wise – Judgment for the Defendant
• Idaho – Maricich v. GreenPoint – Judgment for the Defendant
• New York – MERS v. Korolizky – Judgment for the Plaintiff
• Texas – Mahfoud v. Bank of America – Judgment for the Defendant
• Washington – FNMA v. Edwards – Judgment for the Plaintiff
• Washington – Mickelson v. Chase Home Finance, LLC – Judgment for the Defendant
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.