In a recently issued opinion, the Connecticut Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of a recording statute specifically targeted by the Connecticut legislature to impose higher recording fees on residential mortgage loans where MERS was listed as the nominee of record.
The case, MERSCorp Holdings, Inc., et al. v. Daniel P. Malloy, involved an in-depth
On an issue of first impression, the Tennessee Supreme Court held on December 12, 2015, that MERS does not have a property interest that is protected under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Ditto, the Tennessee Supreme Court held that
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently handed Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) another victory against challenges to MERS’ authority to assign a mortgage. In Ferguson v. Bank of New York Mellon, the Fifth Circuit ultimately held that MERS was a proper beneficiary of the subject deed of trust and, therefore, had the
The Nevada Supreme Court recently reversed – or at least clarified – the impact of MERS in Nevada under the approach set forth in the Restatement (Third) of Property: Mortgages. The Supreme Court had held in 2012 that at the time the note and deed of trust are “split” between the note holder and MERS
Attacking sufficiency, accuracy, or validity of assignments of mortgages and deeds of trust has been among the most common strategies employed by borrowers to challenge foreclosures. Allegations regarding the status of MERS, the legal authority of the individual executing the assignment, and the timing of the assignment’s recording have all been raised and litigated in