In its recent decision (pdf) in Abate v. Fremont Investment & Loan, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) affirmed a Land Court judgment dismissing a foreclosed borrower’s “try title” action.  “Try title” is a nineteenth century cause of action that allows an owner of land to force someone with an adverse claim to the land 

two (A1074067).jpgIn the last few weeks the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) decided two more cases dealing with the effects of botched foreclosure sales. 

The more important decision is U.S. Bank National Association v. Schumacher (pdf).  Schumacher arises from M.G.L. c. 244, §35A, which the Legislature enacted in 2007 in response to the foreclosure crisis.  This statute requires foreclosing banks

Last Friday the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) issued its anxiously-anticipated decision (pdf) in Eaton v. Fannie Mae.  The decision is written by Justice Margot Botsford.

As foreshadowed in our previous posts here and here, Eaton resolves the debate among lower Massachusetts courts and federal judges over whether Massachusetts law requires a foreclosing mortgage holder to also hold

Here is the Supreme Judicial Court’s decision in Eaton v. Fannie Mae, released moments ago.  It appears to require a foreclosing mortgagee to either have physical possession of the underlying promissory note or be acting as the authorized agent of the noteholder.  Crucially for real estate practitioners, the decision applies only prospectively.  More to follow shortly.

Rumor has it that the Supreme Judicial Court will issue its long-awaited decision in the case of Eaton v. Fannie Mae later this morning.  One crucial issue presented is whether a foreclosing mortgagee must hold both the mortgage and the note.  For some background, see my colleague Gordie Orloff’s prior post here.  We will bring you this potentially explosive

A couple of interesting foreclosure-related orders from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, as reported in this week’s Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly (subscription required).

In Morse v. Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., Judge Rya W. Zobel denied the plaintiff’s motion to remand the case to the Massachusetts Land Court.  Judge Zobel ruled that, although the plaintiff’s

In its decision issued this morning in JPMorgan Chase & Co. v. Casarano (pdf), the Appeals Court affirmed a Land Court ruling that, because the promissory note secured by a certain second mortgage can’t be found, that mortgage is unenforceable and must be deemed discharged.  The defendant second mortgage holder argued that enough of the terms of the missing note could