Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Citibank (MERS) v Barabas

Citibank (MERS) v Barabas

Ratings:
(0)
|Views: 576|Likes:
Published by divinaw
Indiana Court of Appeals: 5/17/11 finding that MERS had no right to notice of foreclosure as mortgage stated notice to Lender sufficient. ICOA followed Kansas' "Landmark National" case.
Indiana Court of Appeals: 5/17/11 finding that MERS had no right to notice of foreclosure as mortgage stated notice to Lender sufficient. ICOA followed Kansas' "Landmark National" case.

More info:

Published by: divinaw on May 17, 2011
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

07/10/2013

pdf

text

original

 
FOR PUBLICATION
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES:
MATTHEW S. LOVE MARY A. SLADE
Feiwell & Hannoy, P.C. Plunkett CooneyIndianapolis, Indiana Indianapolis, Indiana
CHRISTOPHER C. HAGENOWSARAH S. FANZINI
Hopper Blackwell, P.C.Indianapolis, Indiana
IN THECOURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
 CITIMORTGAGE, INC., )Appellant-Intervenor/Cross-Claimaint, ))vs. ) No. 48A04-1004-CC-232)SHANNON S. BARABAS A/K/A SHANNON )SHEETS BARABAS,
1
)Cross-Claim Defendant, ))RECASA FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC, )Appellee-Plaintiff/Cross-Claim Defendant, )and )RICK A. SANDERS, )Appellee/Third-Party Defendant. )APPEAL FROM THE MADISON CIRCUIT COURTThe Honorable Fredrick R. Spencer, JudgeCause No. 48C01-0806-CC-593
May 17, 2011
 
OPINION - FOR PUBLICATIONRILEY, Judge
1
Shannon S. Barabas does not participate in this appeal. However, pursuant to Indiana Appellate Rule 17(A), a party of record in the trial court is a party on appeal.
 
FILED
CLERK
of the supreme court,court of appeals andtax court
May 17 2011, 8:24 am
 
 2STATEMENT OF THE CASEAppellant-Intervener/Cross-Claimant, Citimortgage, Inc. (Citi), appeals the trial

-Plaintiff/Cross-ClaimDefendant, ReCasa Financial Group, Inc. LLC (ReCasa), and Appellee/Third-PartyDefendant, Rick A. Sanders (Sanders).We affirm.ISSUECiti raises one issue on appeal, which we restate as follows: Whether the trialcourt a
 
amended default judgment.FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORYOn August 8, 2005, Shannon Barabas (Barabas) executed a $154,111 mortgagesecuring property commonly known as 8285 South Firefly Drive (the Property) inPendleton, Madison County, Indiana. The mortgage states in pertinent part:This Security Instrument is given to Mortgage Electronic Registration

organized and existing under the laws of Delaware, and has an address andtelephone number of P.O. Box 2026, Flint, MI 48501-2026, tel. (888) 679-MERS.
Irwin Mortgage Corporation.

t

and existing under the laws of [t]he State of Indiana, and has an address of 10500 Kincaid

ides that
 
 3

er 

 p. 88). Additionally, with respect to notice, the mortgage provides that:
Any notice to Lender 
shall be given by first class mail to
 
 stated herein or any address Lender designates by notice to Borrower. Anynotice provided for in this Security Instrument shall be deemed to have been given to Borrower or Lender when given as provided in this paragraph.

The mortgage was recorded on August 19,2005 in the

Office.On February 26, 2007, Barabas financed with ReCasa two additional mortgages: afirst mortgage on property in Marion County and a second mortgage on the Property inMadison County in the amount of $100,000.
2
The mortgage was recorded on May 11,2007,

Office. On July 23, 2007, Barabas increased the principal sum of the ReCasa mortgages to $129,600. Nearly a year later, Barabasdefaulted on the underlying loan to ReCasa and on June 13, 2008, ReCasa foreclosed onthe Property. ReCasa named Irwin Mortgage as a defendant; however, on June 23, 2008,Irwin Mortgage filed a disclaimer of interest, which states:COMES NOW the Defendant, Irwin Mortgage Corporation, by counsel,and hereby disclaims any interest in the real estate which is the subject of 

 WHEREFORE, the Defendant, Irwin Mortgage Corporation, prays that thePlaintiff take whatever relief it is entitled to by virtue of its Complaint andseeks all other relief proper in the premises.

 
2
The Marion County property is not subject to this appeal.

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)//-->