About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2017 through April 2018)

handle is hein.ali/retpmrtges0022 and id is 1 raw text is: PROPERTY 3D: MORTGAGES CHAPTER 1. CREATION OF MORTGAGES § 1.1 The Mortgage Concept; No Personal Liability Required Kan.2017. Cit. in sup. Assignee of a mortgage on borrowers' property filed a petition to foreclose the mortgage, naming, among others, bank with junior mortgages on the same property. After a bench trial, the trial court found that assignee lacked standing to foreclose, because it failed to show that it was entitled to enforce the note. The court of appeals affirmed. This court reversed in part and remanded for further proceedings, holding that possession of the mortgage alone was insufficient to establish standing in a mortgage-foreclosure proceeding. The court cited the definition of a mortgage set forth in Restatement Third of Property: Mortgages § 1.1 in noting that, although an interest in a mortgage generally established a sufficient stake in the outcome, in cases such as this that involved acceleration due to default, a foreclosing plaintiff had to establish enforcement rights in the note in order to show that the defendant defaulted and caused a cognizable injury to the plaintiff by failing to pay the accelerated debt. FV-J, Inc. for Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital Holdings, LLC v. Kallevig, 392 P.3d 1248, 1256. § 1.5 Description of the Mortgagee and the Mortgage Obligation Miss.App.2017. Subsec. (b) quot. in sup. Holder of a 2007 deed of trust on real property sued holder of a 2005 deed of trust that originally named no beneficiary, but was rerecorded in 2008 to name the correct beneficiary, seeking a declaratory judgment that its deed of trust had priority over defendant's deed of trust. The trial court granted summary judgment for plaintiff. Affirming, this court held that the blank-beneficiary deed of trust was subordinate to plaintiff s subsequent lien, because plaintiff presented evidence that it lacked actual knowledge of defendant's deed, and defendant did not offer any evidence to contradict plaintiff s evidence. The court explained that, under Restatement Third of Property: Mortgages § 1.5, a mortgage had to identify the mortgagee with reasonable certainty in order to be effective against subsequent grantees. Borries v. Goshen Mortgage, LLC, 219 So.3d 593, 598. CHAPTER 4. RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF THE PARTIES PRIOR TO FORECLOSURE § 4.6 Waste D.Nev.2016. Cit. in sup. The beneficiary of a deed of trust encumbering real property brought a quiet- title and wrongful-foreclosure action against homeowners association and collection service following the foreclosure of the property pursuant to a Nevada homeowners association lien statute that extinguished plaintiff s deed of trust. In granting defendants' summary-judgment motions, this court held that the state statute was constitutional, rejected plaintiff s remaining challenges to the foreclosure sale, and found no equitable grounds for setting aside the foreclosure proceedings. In denying plaintiff s waste claim, the court cited Restatement Third of Property: Mortgages § 4.6, for the proposition that a mA L I For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most