The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee For The Certificateholders Of CWABS Inc., Asset-backed Certificates, Series 2007-6 v. Alan G. Keiran, Provincial Bank, A15-2068

Alan and Mary Jane Keiran refinanced their Lakeville home in Dec. 2006 with Home Capital, executed an adjustable-rate note, and later defaulted on payments in Nov. 2008.
The Keirans sent a written rescission notice in Oct. 2009 under TILA; servicer denied rescission in Jan. 2010; mortgage was assigned to The Bank of New York Mellon in Aug. 2011.
The Keirans sued lenders in federal court under TILA (summary judgment for lenders affirmed on the merits after Supreme Court remand); an appeal was pending at the Eighth Circuit on the merits at the time of this state appeal.
The bank commenced state-court foreclosure in Dec. 2011; after procedural delays and prior interlocutory appellate reversal, the district court ultimately granted summary judgment for the bank on remand.
The district court relied on lack of genuine factual disputes, and preclusion doctrines (res judicata/collateral estoppel) based on the federal TILA litigation; this appeal challenges those rulings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Keiran)	Defendant's Argument (Bank)	Held
Standing to foreclose / ownership of note	Bank failed to prove it holds the note; copies of notes differ and fees are inconsistent, raising factual disputes	Bank produced assigned note, mortgage, payment default evidence, and most recent fee accounting; discrepancies arise from submissions at different times/holders	Court: No genuine issue of material fact; bank established standing and entitlement to foreclosure
Whether foreclosure was a compulsory counterclaim to the Keirans’ federal TILA suit	Foreclosure should have been asserted as a compulsory counterclaim in the earlier federal TILA action, so bank waived it by bringing a later state action	Foreclosure arises from different operative facts (post-issuance performance/default) and is not logically related to the TILA disclosure claim	Court: Foreclosure is not a compulsory counterclaim to the TILA suit; bank did not waive the claim
Recoupment defense in foreclosure	Keirans may recoup TILA-based claims against foreclosure even if statute of limitations would bar an independent action	Bank: Keirans lost their TILA claim on the merits in federal court, so recoupment is precluded by res judicata/collateral estoppel	Court: Recoupment barred because the TILA claim was rejected on the merits in a final federal decision

Ruiz v. 1st Fid. Loan Servicing, LLC, 829 N.W.2d 53 (Minn. 2013) (standard of review for summary judgment)
STAR Ctrs., Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P., 644 N.W.2d 72 (Minn. 2002) (view evidence in light most favorable to nonmoving party on appeal)
Bebo v. Delander, 632 N.W.2d 732 (Minn. App. 2001) (burden shift after prima facie summary-judgment showing)
Popp Telcom v. Am. Sharecom, Inc., 210 F.3d 928 (8th Cir. 2000) (logical-relation test for compulsory counterclaims)
Tullos v. Parks, 915 F.2d 1192 (8th Cir. 1990) (Eighth Circuit preference for logical-relation test)
Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans, 135 S. Ct. 790 (U.S. 2015) (TILA rescission timing; Supreme Court remand in related Keiran litigation)
Household Fin. Corp. v. Pugh, 288 N.W.2d 701 (Minn. 1980) (recoupment doctrine in mortgage context)
Mach v. Wells Concrete Prods. Co., 866 N.W.2d 921 (Minn. 2015) (res judicata standard)
Keiran v. Home Capital, Inc., 720 F.3d 721 (8th Cir. 2013) (prior federal appellate decision relevant to procedural history)