The panel held that the plaintiffs had waived their arguments regarding the MDL Court’s orders determining which claims the JPML had remanded to transferor courts, and which it had transferred to the MDL Court.
The panel held that the MDL Court did not convert the defendants’ motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment.
The panel reversed the district court’s dismissal of Count I, seeking relief based on violations of Arizona’s false documents statute when the defendants allegedly filed false notices of trustee sale, notices of substitution of trustee, and assignments of deed of trust. The plaintiffs alleged that these
documents were notarized in blank and “robosigned” with forged signatures.
The panel affirmed the dismissal of Count II, alleging that the defendants had committed, or would commit, the tort of wrongful foreclosure, in violation of Arizona, California, and Nevada law, because the MERS System impermissibly “splits” ownership of the note from ownership of the deed of trust, thereby making the promissory note unsecured and unenforceable in any foreclosure proceeding. The panel held that these claims failed because none of the plaintiffs alleged
lack of default, tender to cure the default, or an excuse from tendering.
The panel affirmed the dismissal of Count III, alleging that nonjudicial foreclosures conducted under Nev. Rev. Stat. § 107.080 were improper.
MERS Decision 06/12/14 (case # 11- 7615.pdf)
No comments:
Post a Comment