Rosenblum v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems CA1/5, A146526

Rosenblum and Hatfield lived together and disputed ownership of property in Woodside; a 2007 Marvin decision found they each had a 50% equitable interest.
Hatfield alone executed a deed of trust in 2004; MERS was named beneficiary as nominee and later recorded assignments transferring beneficial interest to U.S. Bank.
Hatfield filed bankruptcy; the bankruptcy court held the deed of trust encumbered only Hatfield’s one-half interest and the trustee later conveyed the estate’s interest to Rosenblum by grant deed pursuant to a settlement.
Rosenblum obtained a judicial determination in the Marvin action distributing the joint interests to her as sole and separate property.
Rosenblum sued to quiet title against U.S. Bank and MERS; trial court sustained demurrers as to both. This court in Rosenblum I affirmed dismissal as to U.S. Bank (holding the deed of trust encumbered 50% and that U.S. Bank held the beneficial interest).
On appeal here, the court affirmed dismissal as to MERS, concluding MERS had no adverse claim separate from U.S. Bank and Rosenblum’s remaining challenges were either foreclosed or moot.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether MERS lacked authority/documentation to assign the note and deed of trust, leaving its assignments disputed	Rosenblum: MERS did not produce admissible proof of authority to assign the note/Deed of Trust, so assignment is disputed	MERS: As nominee beneficiary MERS has authority to assign and the assignments were recorded; prior decision resolved ownership in U.S. Bank	Court: Rejected; Rosenblum I already determined U.S. Bank’s beneficial ownership and MERS has no separate adverse interest
Whether MERS’s dismissal violated the one final judgment rule in a quiet title action	Rosenblum: Separate judgment dismissing MERS prevents a single in rem final judgment quieting title against all adverse claimants	MERS: Multiple parties exception applies where judgment leaves no issues as to a party; MERS had no adverse claim	Court: Rejected; issue moot and meritless—MERS had no independent interest and separate dismissal was proper

Marvin v. Marvin, 18 Cal.3d 660 (Cal. 1976) (foundation for claims about property rights between unmarried cohabitants)
Fontenot v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 198 Cal.App.4th 256 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (describes MERS system and nominee role)
Yvanova v. New Century Mortgage Corp., 62 Cal.4th 919 (Cal. 2016) (discusses defects in mortgage transfers; limits on certain challenges)
Herrera v. Federal National Mortgage Assn., 205 Cal.App.4th 1495 (Cal. Ct. App. 2012) (recognizes MERS’s power as nominee beneficiary to assign deeds of trust)
Intengan v. BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, 214 Cal.App.4th 1047 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (standard of review for demurrer appeals)
West v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 214 Cal.App.4th 780 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (quiet title requires adverse claim; demurrer proper where judicially noticed documents negate adverse claim)
Linthicum v. Butterfield, 175 Cal.App.4th 259 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) (disclaimer alone does not suffice to quiet title)
Gyerman v. United States Lines Co., 7 Cal.3d 488 (Cal. 1972) (law-of-the-case doctrine explained)