Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
5Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
MERS Amicus Brief by famed April Charney

MERS Amicus Brief by famed April Charney

Ratings: (0)|Views: 18 |Likes:
Published by 83jjmack
MERS Amicus Brief
MERS Amicus Brief

More info:

Published by: 83jjmack on Jun 09, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/18/2010

pdf

text

original

 
i
TABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF AUTHORITIES.....................................................................................i INTERESTS OF
 AMICI CURIAE 
.............................................................................1 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT...............................................................................2 ARGUMENT.............................................................................................................4 I. The MERS System Was Designed Without Regard to Consumers’ Rights4 II. MERS’ Claims That the MERS System Is Beneficial toConsumers Are Unsupported.......................................................................6 III. Homeowners Have a Right to Know Who Owns Their Loans....................8 IV. The MERS System Causes Significant Confusion Among Borrowers,and Has a Particularly Detrimental Impact on the Elderly andOther Vulnerable Borrowers Frequently Victimized byPredatory Lenders.....................................................................................14 V. The Public Has a Significant and Enduring Interest in Preserving andProtecting the Free Public Databases Created by the Land and CourtRecords of This Nation.............................................................................18 A. Public land and court data records facilitate research investigatingthe root causes of a variety of mortgage and other land relatedproblems...............................................................................................18 B. The public databases have played an important role in facilitatingunderstanding and government response to the recent “foreclosureboom.”..................................................................................................23 C. Through its penetration of the public databases MERS has causeda dramatic deterioration in the quality and quantity of publiclyavailable information...........................................................................28 D. The MERS Shield Creates an Irretrievable Void in the PropertyRecords that Harms Many Constituencies...........................................32 
 
ii
E. Restoration and enhancement of the public database is critical to enablegovernment to function effectively......................................................33 F. More, not less public data is needed to enable a carefully targeted andrapid governmental response to problems in the housing market.......35 VI. MERS’ Subversion of the Public Policy Behind Public Recordings CostsCounty and City Clerks Over a Billion Dollars........................................38 VII. MERS Lacks Standing to Bring Foreclosure Actions in Its Name...........39CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................46
 
i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESCases
 Altegra Credit Co. v. Tin Chu
 
et al.
,No. 04326-2004 (Kings County Supreme Ct. March 25, 2004)...................24, 36
 Associates Home Equity v. Troup
,343 N.J. Super. 254 (App. Div. 2001).................................................................21
Countrywide Home Loans v. Hannaford 
,2004 WL 1836744 (Ohio Ct. App. Aug. 18, 2004)............................................17
 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee v. Primrose
,No. 05-25796 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., July 13, 2006);...............................46
 Everhome Mortgage Company v. Hendriks,
 No. 05-024042 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., June 27, 2006);............................46
Freedom Mortg. Corp. v. Burnham Mortg., Inc.
,2006 WL 695467 (N.D. Ill., Mar. 13, 2006).......................................................17
 In re BNT Terminals, Inc.
,125 B.R. 963, 970 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1990)..........................................................45
Kluge v. Fugazy
,145 A.D.2d 537, 536 N.Y.S.2d 92 (2d Dept. 1988)............................................44
 LaSalle Bank v. Holguin
, No. 06-9286, slip opinion (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Suffolk Cty.,Aug. 9, 2006);................................................................................................43, 45
 LaSalle Bank v. Lamy,
 2006 N.Y. Misc. Lexis 2127 (NY. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., Aug. 17, 2006).......46
 MERS v. Bomba
,No. 1645/03 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Kings County).......................................................48
 MERS v. DeMarco,
 No. 05-1372, slip op. (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., April 11, 2005)..................46
 MERS v. Griffin
,No.16-2004-CA-002155, slip op. (Fla. Cir. Ct. May 27, 2004)..........................49
 MERS v. Ramdoolar,
 No. 05-019863 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., Mar. 7, 2006);..............................46
 MERS v. Shuster,
 No. 05-26354/06 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., July 13, 2006).....................44, 46
 MERS v. Trapani,
No. 04-19057, slip op. at 1 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., Mar. 7, 2005):...........48
 MERS v. Wells,
 No. 06-5242, slip op. at 2 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., Sept. 25, 2006)............45
 MERS v.Delzatto,
 No. 05-020490 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Suffolk Cty., Dec. 9, 2005)...............................46

Activity (5)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
R. Ethier liked this
waypissed liked this
dude32 liked this
iceteaxtrasugar liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->