The Ninth Circuit \, U.S. Court of Appeals dismissed in part, reversed in part, and affirmed in part, an appeal from the dismissal of numerous allegations in multidistrict litigation challenging the role of MERS in the foreclosure process.
The Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of a claim with regards to “robo signing”, based upon Arizona’s false documents statute, but upheld the dismal of other claims.
The complaint had a count alleging wrongful foreclosure based upon “note-splitting” – in violation of Nevada, California and Arizona law – the Ninth Circuit found that claims failed because “none of the [borrowers] has shown a lack of default, tender, or an excuse from the tender requirement, [borrowers’] wrongful foreclosure claims cannot succeed.”
The Ninth Circuit ruled that Edelstein v. Bank of New York Mellon, 286 P.3d 249 (Nev. 2012) “makes clear that MERS does have the authority, for the purposes of Nev. Rev. Stat. Sec. 107.080, to make valid assignments of the deed of trust to a successor beneficiary…”
The Court found the borrowers’ allegations of wrongful foreclosures under Arizona, California and Nevada law were without merit and rejected the related claim of aiding and abetting wrongful foreclosure.
A copy of the opinion is available at: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/06/12/11-17615.pdf.
Clearwater Bankruptcy, 28870 U.S. Hwy 19 #300, Hodusa Towers, Clearwater, FL 33761,
Phone: (727) 330-1627 email: calh@gate.net