In another twist, the Baltimore Sun reports that Shapiro & Burson has been sued by a former employee who alleges that he was told to notarize stacks of instruments signed by one non-firm attorney who had signed for absent firm attornies. I have not yet read the complaint, so I can't describe more than what is in the news article.
As a title lawyer, I have only received one claim involving allegations of wrongfully notarized lawyer signatures. I expect that the plaintiff's bar recognizes that most of these signatures are easily fixed, and that even if a foreclosure is vacated and re-advertised, the borrower either can or cannot afford his mortgage.
Maryland lawyers with offices in Baltimore focused on real estate, business and construction litigation in the state and federal courts of Maryland and the District of Columbia.
Showing posts with label assignments. Show all posts
Showing posts with label assignments. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 9, 2011
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
MERS is engrossing fiction, according to the NY Times.
Well worth reading. If you haven't been chasing the recent decisions around the Country, here's a good primer on the MERS mess. With phrases like "engrossing fiction," "cut corners," and "colossal mistakes," you can see where this article is heading.
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
imMERSed in a sea of differing opinions.
On February 11, 2011, Judge Karlin of the Kansas bankruptcy court sent more waves through the foreclosure and title community pool (a "title pool?"). The Martinez decision upholds MERS status as the lender's agent, for purposes of establishing standing by the current lienholder.
Compare this to New York bankruptcy Judge Grossman's February 10, 2011 Agard decision, for purposes of assignments that establish standing.
Read for yourself, and you'll be left to ask, "who's steering this boat?" I've talked with several local trustees, and they simply don't know what to do with this patchwork of analysis that is dropping from the various courts. I personally believe that recent state court decisions defining "non-possessory holders" will cut through this issue.
Compare this to New York bankruptcy Judge Grossman's February 10, 2011 Agard decision, for purposes of assignments that establish standing.
Read for yourself, and you'll be left to ask, "who's steering this boat?" I've talked with several local trustees, and they simply don't know what to do with this patchwork of analysis that is dropping from the various courts. I personally believe that recent state court decisions defining "non-possessory holders" will cut through this issue.
Labels:
Agard,
assignments,
bankruptcy court,
grossman,
Kansas,
karlin,
Martinez,
MERS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)