California Appellate Court Affirms Dismissal of Claim Against Title Company and Title Agent, Holds That They Had No Duty to Inform Insured Purchaser of Seller’s Involvement in Other Lawsuits

The California Court of Appeals recently held that a title insurance company and title agent had no duty to inform their insured purchaser that the individual selling the property, and who was going to act as the insured’s property manager, was involved in multiple other lawsuits.  See Ukoha v. Provident Title Co., 2020 WL 3467817 (Cal. Ct. App. June 25, 2020), reh’g denied (July 15, 2020). 

New Mexico Bankruptcy Court Holds Claim Regarding Prior Mortgage Barred by Exclusion 3(a)

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico recently found that an insured’s claim regarding a prior mortgage was barred by the title insurance policy’s Exclusion 3(a) and the fact that the insured could not prove any damages.  See In re: Lamey, 2020 WL 4045254 (Bankr. D.N.M. July 17, 2020).  Plaintiff is an LLC and the insured owner of a property, and defendant issued a title insurance policy on the property.

Michigan Appellate Court Holds Title Insurer and Agent Not Liable for Negligent Misrepresentation and Breach of Contract

The Court of Appeals of Michigan recently affirmed a decision finding that a title insurance company and title agent were not liable to an insured for negligent misrepresentation or breach of contract for an issue with a disputed portion of property that fell outside the policy’s legal description.  See Shower Curtain Sols. Ltd., LLC v. First Am. Title Ins. Co., 2020 WL 3393467 (Mich. Ct. App. June 18, 2020). 

New Jersey Appellate Division Affirms Vacation of Judgment and Dismissal of Action Eight Years After Final Judgment, Finds Plaintiff Violated FDCPA

New Jersey’s Appellate Division recently affirmed a trial court decision vacating a final judgment and dismissing a complaint despite the fact that the defendant waited eight years to bring the motion, finding that the plaintiff brought the action outside the limitations period and violated the FDCPA.  See LVNV Funding, LLC v. Deangelo, 2020 WL 3163668 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. June 15, 2020).

New York’s Fourth Department Holds Title Insurer Not Liable for Attorneys’ Fees in Action Brought by Insured Against Neighbor

New York’s Appellate Division, Fourth Department, recently dismissed an action brought by an insured property owner against its title insurer, finding that the title insurer was not obligated to bring an action against the insured’s neighbor over a disputed portion of property, and therefore that the insurer was not obligated to pay the insured’s attorneys’ fees when the insured brought the action against the neighbor. 

New York Federal Court Dismisses Action Against Servicer Regarding Force-Placed Insurance as Moot, Denies Motion to Amend to Add FDCPA, RESPA, and TILA Claims

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York dismissed an action against a loan servicer and denied plaintiff’s motion to amend to add FDCPA, RESPA, and TILA claims, holding that plaintiff’s initial allegations were mooted by defendant’s refund of the allegedly improper charges, and that plaintiff did not sufficiently set forth the elements of these other causes of action.  See Izmirligil v. Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., 2020 WL 1941192 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 22, 2020).

New Jersey Appellate Division Holds Entire Controversy Doctrine Does Not Bar Foreclosure Complaint Filed After Federal Action on Insurance Proceeds

In a decision approved for publication, New Jersey’s Appellate Division recently held that New Jersey’s entire controversy doctrine did not prohibit a lender from bringing a foreclosure complaint after the homeowners’ federal lawsuit against its insurance companies and the lender was dismissed.  See Carrington Mortg. Servs., LLC v. Moore, 2020 WL 3067503 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. June 10, 2020).