The California Court of Appeals recently found that a quiet title action brought by homeowners challenging a deed of trust five years after receiving a notice of trustee’s sale was not untimely because their possession was not disturbed, as they immediately submitted the issue to the title insurer. See Huang v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2020 WL 2059951 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 29, 2020).
The Appellate Court of Illinois recently found that borrowers bringing a claim under the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) for a lender’s refusal to rescind a mortgage must bring the action within one year of the lender’s violation. See U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass'n v. Miller, 2020 IL App (1st) 191029 (Ill. App. 2020). The defendant borrowers refinanced their mortgage in 2007.
The New Jersey Chancery Division in Bergen County recently vacated a final judgment of foreclosure based on the defendant’s principal’s health issues and its attorney’s alleged negligence. See BV001 REO Blocker, LLC v. HB (USA) Properties, LLC, Docket No. BER-F-2097-19. Plaintiff filed a tax foreclosure complaint relating to the defendant entity’s property in January 2019 and served defendant in February.
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia recently held that an insured was not entitled to a defense in a lawsuit alleging a forged deed after it conveyed the property, and when the underlying complaint alleges that the insured was involved in wrongful conduct. See Sec. Title Guarantee Corp. of Baltimore v. 915 Decatur St NW, LLC, 2019 WL 6728449 (D.D.C. Dec. 11, 2019), as amended (Mar. 23, 2020).
In response to the continuing efforts to combat COVID-19, on May 7, 2020, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo issued Executive Order (“EO”) 202.28 which extends, among other things, EO 202.7 (remote notarization) and EO 202.14 (remote witnessing) until June 6, 2020, unless further extended by Governor Cuomo.
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico recently found that a title insurance company was not liable for the alleged negligent acts of the title agent in failing to discharge a mortgage. See Lamey v. Las Cruces Abstract and Title Co., et al., 2020 WL 1884189 (Bankr. D.N.M. Apr. 15, 2020). In the case, the insured plaintiffs brought an action against a title agent and a title insurance company based on the agent’s failure to discharge a mortgage.
In a decision approve for publication, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, sitting en banc, recently reversed its prior holding and held that a debt collection letter does not need to expressly state that the debtor must dispute the validity of the debt in writing under Section 1692g(a)(3) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). See Riccio v. Sentry Credit, Inc., 954 F.3d 582 (3d Cir. 2020).
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia recently held that a title insurance company had no duty to defend or indemnify an insured property owner for an issue regarding a shared roadway because the roadway itself was not part of the insured property, and the claim was barred by the survey and parties in possession exceptions. See Tritapoe v. Old Republic Nat’l Title Ins. Co., 2020 WL 1487813 (W. Va. Mar. 23, 2020).
On April 14, 2020, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy signed into law A-3903/S-2336, which, subject to certain requirements, temporarily allows remote notarizations during the Public Health Emergency and State of Emergency declared by Governor Murphy in Executive Order 103 on March 9, 2020.
The Appellate Court of Connecticut recently held that a lender’s loss under a title insurance policy is limited to the amount paid at a tax sale foreclosure minus the amount of taxes, regardless of what the court in the lender’s own foreclosure action found to be the fair market value. See RCN Capital, LLC v. Chicago Title Insurance Company, 196 Conn. App. 528 (2020).