Georgeine Mike Korompay v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for Carrington Mortgage Loan Trust Series 2005-NC3 Asset Backed Pass Through Certificates, 03-14-00523-CV

Appellant Georgeine Korompay appealed a county court judgment granting possession to Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., trustee for the Carrington Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2005-NC3, in a forcible-detainer proceeding.
Appellant introduced the Trust prospectus and an assignment recorded in 2010; the Trust’s closing (startup) date was June 7, 2005.
Appellant argued the Trust is a REMIC and federal tax law (26 U.S.C. § 860G) requires mortgages to be transferred to a REMIC on the startup day or purchased within three months thereafter.
The assignment at issue occurred roughly five years after the Trust’s closing; Appellant contended that untimely inclusion violated the REMIC rules and thus was void as contrary to federal law and public policy.
Appellant argued that because title is disputed (ownership is an element of forcible detainer), the justice/county courts lacked jurisdiction to decide possession; the assignment’s invalidity means appellee lacked ownership/authority to foreclose.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Appellee)	Defendant's Argument (Korompay)	Held
Whether the assignment to the REMIC was lawful under federal REMIC rules	Assignment valid and conveys ownership/possession rights	Assignment was untimely under 26 U.S.C. § 860G and therefore void ab initio	Court below granted possession to appellee (appellant contends this was error)
Whether an assignment that violates federal REMIC law is void or merely voidable	Assignment creates a valid chain for purposes of possession	Violation of federal statute makes the assignment illegal and void; cannot be ratified	Appellant argues federal law controls and renders assignment unenforceable
Whether state courts must enforce federal law regarding REMIC qualification	State court may adjudicate forcible detainer	State courts are required to apply federal law and decline enforcement of contracts illegal under federal law	Appellant contends supremacy requires enforcement of REMIC statute, depriving court of jurisdiction if title depends on illegal assignment
Whether a title dispute arising from an illegal assignment divests justice/county courts of jurisdiction in a forcible detainer action	Appellee proceeded in forcible detainer asserting superior possession	Because possession depends on title (ownership), a genuine title dispute bars justice/county court jurisdiction over possession	Appellant urges reversal for lack of jurisdiction due to title dispute

Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (agency deference framework)
Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, 565 U.S. 368 (state courts must hear federal claims unless Congress precludes them)
Hurd v. Hodge, 334 U.S. 24 (courts must refuse to enforce private agreements violative of federal public policy)
W.R. Grace & Co. v. Local Union 759, 461 U.S. 757 (contracts contrary to explicit public policy are unenforceable)
Howlett v. Rose, 496 U.S. 356 (state courts have duty to enforce federal law)
Maryland v. Louisiana, 451 U.S. 725 (state law preempted where it conflicts with federal law)
First Nat'l Bank v. Comptroller of Currency, 697 F.2d 674 (5th Cir.) (statutory limits can render transactions illegal and void)
Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Conner, 973 F.2d 1236 (5th Cir.) (public policy determined by law and precedent)
First Nat'l Collection Bureau, Inc. v. Walker, 348 S.W.3d 329 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2011) (state courts’ obligation to apply federal law under Supremacy Clause)