Appeals court hears challenge to standing in US Bank foreclosure
Loading...
Summary
Defendant's counsel argued that US Bank and trustees lack a financial stake in the mortgage and that a photocopied endorsement and broken assignment chain undermine standing; plaintiff's counsel said housing-court statutory affidavits and deeds generally satisfy the burden in possession actions.
Appellant Mark O'Brien told the court that corporate filings and SEC-type disclosures indicate US Bank has "no financial interest" in the mortgage at issue and that securitization and assignment practices raise genuine questions about whether the plaintiff held the note at the time foreclosure was initiated. He urged reversal of summary judgment and vacation of the foreclosure on standing grounds.
Plaintiffs' counsel Robert Tenney responded that housing court practice requires only a low initial showing—foreclosure deed and affidavits—to shift the burden and that the record here included affidavits and documents that, under controlling precedent, established the plaintiff's possession or authority to foreclose. Tenney also argued the trial court properly excluded an investigator's report that the appellant relied on and noted limited discovery occurred on some peripheral issues.
The panel focused on record inconsistencies about a prior dismissal for failure to pay use-and-occupancy fees and on whether the appellate record contains the materials needed to determine the jurisdictional posture. The court submitted the case for decision.
