Bank of America, N.A. v. Gibson
102 A.3d 462
| Pa. Super. Ct. | 2014Background
- In 2007, Appellant mortgaged property to National Bank of Kansas City with MERS as nominee.
- Mortgage allows MERS to exercise lender’s interests, including releasing and cancelling the Security Instrument.
- MERS assigned the mortgage along the chain to Countrywide, then BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, which Bank of America later merged into.
- Bank of America filed a 2012 foreclosure; Appellant answered with denials and alleged he never executed a mortgage with MERS.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Bank of America; Appellant appealed contending lack of authority and note possession.
- Court affirms, ruling MERS had authority to assign and Bank of America held the note; Nanty-Glo concerns deemed inapplicable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did MERS have authority to assign the mortgage? | Gibson argues MERS lacked authority to assign. | Bank of America argues the mortgage expressly gave MERS authority to exercise interests and assign. | MERS had authority to assign the mortgage. |
| Does Bank of America hold the note securing the mortgage? | Gibson contends the note is not properly endorsed to Bank of America. | Bank of America holds a bearer/blank-endorsed note, evidenced by the record, entitling it to enforce. | Bank of America holds the note securing the mortgage. |
| Is Nanty-Glo inapplicable to entry of summary judgment here? | Nanty-Glo rule bars summary judgment based on inadmissible hearsay affidavit. | Nanty-Glo does not apply; loan-history records are admissible as business records with foundation. | Nanty-Glo inapplicable; summary judgment proper without reliance on inadmissible hearsay. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ralich v. MERS, 982 A.2d 77 (Pa. Super. 2009) (mortgage language authorizes MERS to enforce the loan)
- First Wis. Tr. Co. v. Strausser, 653 A.2d 688 (Pa. Super. 1995) (general denials admitted as to principal and interest in mortgage foreclosures)
- J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Murray, 63 A.3d 1258 (Pa. Super. 2013) (PUCC note is negotiable; note endorsed in blank is bearer instrument)
- Nanty-Glo v. American Surety Co., 163 A.523 (Pa. 1932) (limits on use of certain affidavits in summary-judgment procedure)