EXCERPT:

In this case, Plaintiff has not provided any evidence which shows that when MERS assigned the mortgage to Plaintiff, it also transferred the interest in the underlying note. According to the mortgage assignment contract, MERS held legal title to the mortgage. There is no language in the agreement which transfers interest in the note to MERS. Because MERS did not hold title to the underlying note, it could not transfer any rights to the underlying note when it assigned the mortgage to Plaintiff. See LPP Mortgage Ltd v. Sabine Properties No. 103648/10,2010 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4216, at*7 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Co. Sept. 1, 2010); Lamy , 824 N.Y.S.2d at 769 (Sup. Ct. Suffolk Co. 2006); HSBC Bank USA v. Miller, 26 Misc. 3d 407,411,889 N.Y.S.2d 430,433 (Sup. Ct. Sullivan Co. 2009). Without a transfer of title to the underlying note, Plaintiff cannot foreclose on the property based on default payment and lacks standing under CPLR 5 321 1 (a)(3)

[...]

Therefore, it is
ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss is granted; and it is further
ORDERED that this action is dismissed; and it is further
ORDERED that the clerk of the court directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Continue below…

Scribd

Related posts:

1. FINAL DISPOSITION| NO Evidence ‘MERS’ Owned The NOTE, Could NOT ASSIGN IT NY SUPREME COURT: FINAL DISPOSITION Here, there are no allegations...
2. ‘NO PROOF’ MERS assigned BOTH Mortgage and NOTE to HSBC The “Assignment of Mortgage,” which is attached as exhibit E...
3. NO MENTION OF DEBT OR NOTE ON ASSIGNMENT, DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE: WACHOVIA v. VARGAS NYSC SUPREME COURT – STATE OF NEW YORK TRIAL TERM. PART...
4. [NYSC] MERS HAS NO INTEREST, STANDING, OFFICER AFFIDAVIT HAS NO PROVATIVE VALUE SUPREME COURT – STATE OF NEW YORK IAS PART 6...
5. NYSC FINDS BNY FAILED TO SUBMIT ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE: Bank of New York v. Elserafy 2010 SUPREME COURT – STATE OF NEW YORK Present: HON. F....