Now Updating
Joseph Hill v. Raquel King

Summarizing by J Newman

Christie v. The Bank of New York Mellon

Citation:
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 14-55012 (June 11, 2015)
Tag(s):
Ruling:
Plaintiff did not have standing to challenge assignees' enforcement of a promissory note and deed of trust because of alleged irregularities in connection with the assignment of the promissory note and deed of trust to assignees.
Procedural context:
Appeal from order of District Court dismissing complaint for declaratory and other relief for failure to state a claim.
Facts:
Based upon alleged irregularities in connection with the assignment of a promissory note and related deed of trust, Plaintiff filed a complaint for declaratory relief in the District Court that several entities demanding mortgage payments did not have authority to demand such payments, could not foreclose and were in violation of various federal and state statutes. The District Court dismissed all claims and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Plaintiff did not have standing to challenge the irregularities in assignment because the note and deed of trust were negotiable. The California Commercial Code did not confer standing because foreclosure is governed by the Civil Code, and the Civil Code does not permit preemptive challenges to foreclosure. Plaintiff did not have standing to challenge the irregularities under New York law, which governed the securitization trust that was the assignee, because Plaintiff was not an intended beneficiary of the trust. Plaintiff could not rely upon a consent order between one of the lenders and the United States government because Plaintiff was not an intended beneficiary of the consent order. Plaintiff could not allege negligence because the lenders did not owe Plaintiff a duty of care. Because Plaintiff could not challenge the assignees' right to collect the debt even if there were irregularities in assignment, Plaintiff could not allege a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Unfair Competition Law, or for cancellation of a written instrument.
Judge(s):
Lipez, Wardlaw and Murguia

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!

About us in numbers

3047 in the system

2940 Summarized

2 Being Processed