Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, et al – MERS Ruling in Oregon Part 2
By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.
Two Oregon Supreme Court Rulings came out yesterday relating to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. The first was Brandrup v. ReconTrust Co. (June 6, 2013), and the subject of this post, which is Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, et al. (June 6, 2013).
Note the following quotes from this ruling:
That is so because, on the present record, MERS’ involvement in the appointment of the current trustee casts doubt on the trustee’s status.
and
But, appointments of a successor trustee may only be made by the trust deed beneficiary, ORS 86.790(3), and, as discussed, MERS is not, and never has been, the beneficiary of the trust deed for purposes of the OTDA.
The ruling is listed in part as follows:
En Banc
On review from the Court of Appeals.*
Argued and submitted on January 8, 2013.
Gregory A. Chaimov, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Portland, argued the cause for
petitioner on review Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. With him on the
brief were Frederick B. Burnside and Kevin H. Kono.
W. Jeffrey Barnes, pro hac vice, W. J. Barnes, PA, Beverly Hills, argued the cause
for respondent on review. With him on the brief was Elizabeth Lemoine, Makler
Lemoine & Goldberg, PC, Portland.
Hope A. Del Carlo, Portland, filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Oregon Trial
Lawyers Association.
Rolf C. Moan, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed a brief on behalf of
amicus curiae State of Oregon.
BREWER, J.
The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. The judgment of the circuit
court is reversed, and the case is remanded to that court for further proceedings.
Kistler, J., concurred in part and specially concurred in part and wrote an opinion
in which Balmer, C.J. joined.
*Appeal from Clackamas County Circuit Court, Henry C. Breithaupt, Judge. 251
Or App 278, 284 P3d 1157 (2012).
Continue reading “Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, et al – MERS Ruling in Oregon Part 2”