The Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) is soliciting amicus briefs in Galiastro v. Mortgage Electronic Registration System, Inc., an appeal that presents the issue of whether the defendant, MERS, has standing to foreclose in its own right as the named mortgagee in a mortgage, when it does not have any ownership interest or rights in the underlying promissory note.  The SJC

Just when we thought the Supreme Judicial Court’s Eaton decision (see our post here) had resolved the last big question regarding foreclosure requirements, another case is providing new foreclosure fodder.  Recently, the SJC requested amicus briefs in Federal National Mortgage Association v. Hendricks, SJC-11234.dog 

In this case a mortgagor, Hendricks, was evicted after his home was foreclosed.  He appealed, arguing that Mortgage Electronic

In a ruling that may presage the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s eagerly awaited decision in Eaton v. Federal National Mortgage Association (see our related posts here and here), a divided Supreme Court of Michigan has reversed a Court of Appeals decision that required Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) to hold both the promissory note and the

In two decisions issued this fall and published this week in Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, the U.S. District Court in Massachusetts rejected all claims of plaintiffs challenging the foreclosure of their properties.lump of coal

In Archambault v. Aurora Loan Services, LLC (pdf), the plaintiffs tried to stop the foreclosure of their home by filing suit claiming that the defendant lacked authority to foreclose because

This week, Judge William G. Young of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued an exhaustive 59-page decision addressing two key issues that recur in countless foreclosure cases:  the need for the foreclosing mortgagee to hold both the mortgage and the note, and the validity of a foreclosure of a mortgage once held

Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley today filed a wide-ranging lawsuit in Suffolk County Superior Court in Boston against Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, GMAC, Wells Fargo and MERS, alleging that the defendants’ conduct in foreclosing “hundreds, if not thousands” of mortgages in Massachusetts was fraudulent, unfair, deceptive and in violation of numerous provisions of Massachusetts

In previous posts (here and here) we’ve discussed the question of whether ownership of the mortgage and the note must be unified in the same person.  Superior Court Judge Cornelius Moriarty has now weighed in, with his split decision on the defendants’ motion to dismiss in Mack v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 29 Mass. L.