Cases

655 F.Supp.2d 451 (2009) Edward SKYPALA, Individually and as a representative on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., M & T Mortgage Corp., Zucker Goldberg, and Ackerman, and John Doe Servicers 1-100, and John Doe Law Firms 1-100, Defendants. CIV. No. 08-5867 (JEI/JS). United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

259 S.W.3d 19 (2008) John R. DOBSON and Samatherith T. Dobson, Plaintiffs/Respondents, v. MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC./GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Defendant, and First National Bank of Arizona, Defendant/Appellant, and Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Company, Doering & Associates, P.C., and Hilton & Hartford, LLC, Defendants. Nos. ED 89385, ED 89417. Missouri Court

354 B.R. 591 (2006) In re Stephanie BROWN, Debtor. Stephanie D. Brown, Plaintiff, v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee of the Aegis Asset Backed Securities Trust 2004-3, Defendants. No. 05-12431-ANV, A.P. No. 05-01052, C.A. No. 05-523S. United States District Court, D. Rhode Island. November 17, 2006.

Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v McVicar (2022 NY Slip Op 01785) Mortgage Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v McVicar 2022 NY Slip Op 01785 Decided on March 16, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Published b

Baker, Judge. [1] GO Properties, LLC (GO Properties) had two members that were, themselves, limited liability companies (LLCs). Stacy Phillips, who was the sole member of one of those LLCs, went rogue. She falsely held herself out as having the authority to act on behalf of GO Properties in an endeavor to sell real estate that belonged to the LLC. The title insurance agent relied on Phi

659 F.Supp.2d 940 (2009) Eugene KLINE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC SECURITY SYSTEMS, et al., Defendants. Case No. 3:08cv408. United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division. September 21, 2009. *943 Jeffrey Michael Silverstein, Jeffrey M. Silverstein & Associates, Dayton, OH, Paul Grobman, New York, N

OPINION W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”), a subsidiary of MERSCORP, Inc., operates an electronic mortgage registration system (“the MERS System”). MERS is distinct from the MERS System. The MERS System is a private electronic database that records the ownership of and servicing rights in home loans. Various

The defendant below, Clifford Bennett, appeals from the circuit court's denial of his motion to set aside a default judgment entered against him. Because Bennett *Page 936 has not shown a valid meritorious defense, because he has not shown that the plaintiff will not be prejudiced if his motion were granted, and because he has not shown that the default was not a result of his own culpable conduct, we conclude that he failed to show that the trial

OPINION {¶ 1} Appellant, Heidi Petry, appeals the judgment entry of the Portage County Court of Common Pleas, which set aside a sheriffs sale of her property; vacated its previous order confirming the sale; and granted leave to appellee, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. to re-order the sale of the property. Appellant challenges the constitutionality of Senate Bill 185, which, she claims, den

MEMORANDUM OPINION ALEXANDER WILLIAMS, JR., District Judge. Pending before the Court are Counterclaim-Defendants Metropolitan Regional Information Systems, Inc. (“MRIS”) and National Association of Realtors (“NAR”)’s Motions to Dismiss the Second Amended Counterclaims of American Home Realty Network, Inc. (“AHRN”). The procedural background of this case has been covered in extensive detail in t

19-763-cv (L) N.J. Carpenters Health Fund v. NovaStar Mortgage, Inc. 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 2 FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT 3 ------ 4 August Term, 2019 5 (Argued: February 19, 2020 Decided: March 14, 2022) 6 Docket Nos. 19-763-cv (L), 19-795-cv (Con) 7 ____________________________________________________

ORDER CALLIE V.S. GRANADE, District Judge. On August 16, 2013, Magistrate Judge Bivins submitted a report and recommendation (Doc. 24) on Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 10). Judge Bivins recommended that the court dismiss all Plaintiff’s claims except her claim for breach of contract. Plaintiff did not object, but Defendants did. The matter comes before the court on Defendants’ objection t

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS CITI MORTGAGE, INC. AND ABN AMRO MORTGAGE GROUP, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON ALL CLAIMS AGAINST MOVANTS IN THE COMPLAINT FILED ON NOVEMBER 8, 2010 LESLIE E. KOBAYASHI, District Judge. On October 3, 2012, Defendants Citi Mortgage, Inc. (“CMI”) and ABN Amro *920Mortgage Group, Inc. (“ABN”, collectively “

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER WILLIAM F. KUNTZ, II, District Judge. Plaintiffs, a group of several hundred current and former homeowners, brought this action against several dozen mortgage originators and servicers (collectively “Defendants”), alleging Defendants, inter alia, induced Plaintiffs to enter into mortgages based on inflated appraisals; purposefully avoided local recordation statutes, t

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JAMES O. BROWNING, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) ■ the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of Proposed Settlement, Plan of Allocation and Certification of Class for Settlement Purposes, filed July 23, 2012 (Doc. 391)(“Motion for Final Approval”); and (ii) Co-Lead Counsel’s Motion for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses and Memo

Opinion Overruling Objection to Proof of Claim and Granting Relief from the Automatic Stay BRUCE A. MARKELL, Bankruptcy Judge. I. FACTS A. The Home Loan. DO oi B. The Bankruptcy Proceedings. DO en 1. The Proof of Claim and the Objection. DO oí 2. The Second Allonge . DO üi 3. The Motion for Relief from Sta

OPINION Slomsky, District Judge Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION... 626 II. BACKGROUND...626 A. Conveyance of the Property and the Terms of the First Mortgage... 626 B. The Fire Insurance Policy.. .628 C. The Second Mortgage Assignment ...629 D. Fire Loss and Insurance Proceeds ...629</

FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, No. 19-17043 Plaintiff-Appellee, D.C. No. v. 2:15-cv-02151- JAD-NJK SATICOY BAY LLC, SERIES 9229 MILLIKAN AVENUE; MILLIKAN AVENUE TRUST,

Opinion issued August 11, 2022 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-20-00799-CV ——————————— ARIEL MONTOYA AND OFELIA MONTOYA, Appellants V. AMCAP MORTGAGE, LTD, Appellee

ORDER PATRICK J. SCHILTZ, District Judge. In recent years, the federal courts have been inundated with lawsuits brought by homeowners challenging the foreclosures of the mortgages on their homes. Some of these lawsuits are meritorious, but many are not, and quite a few are frivolous. The most common type of frivolous lawsuit is premised on what judges often refer to as the “show-me-the-note” theory.