CHAPTER 13 BANKRUPTCY
Jan 13 2026
A Chapter 13 Bankruptcy formerly known as “a wage earner’s plan” is a reorganization of the ho... [Read More...]
April 25, 2015 By
Note And Mortgage Assigned On Numerous Occasions
Justice Carolyn Demarest looked into the fact the note and mortgage had been assigned many times. Upon close examination she found all three assignments were assigned by a single person. This individual was identified only as an “authorized signator”. There was no explanation as to which entity the person was working for at the time he signed all three assignments. In addition, the bank alleged it had physical possession of the note before the commencement of the action. However, the judge found there was no explanation in the affidavit submitted by the bank’s servicer as to why assignment number three was dated more than a month before assignments one and two.
Bank’s Standing to Foreclose Challenged
The homeowners challenged the bank’s standing to proceed on this foreclosure lawsuit. Justice Demarest in her decision stated, the bank claimed the physical possession of the note, in and of itself, gave it standing at the time of the commencement of the lawsuit.
Summary Judgment and Motion to Dismiss Denied
Justice Demarest found the defendants had raised an issue of fact with regard to whether the bank actually had possession of the note before the action was initiated. Based on this, she denied the bank’s motion for summary judgment and to strike the defendant’s first and fifth affirmative defenses.
Conclusion
It is clear the bank’s representations cannot possibly be true in this case. As stated most eloquently by William Shakespeare, “there is something rotten in Denmark.”