S T A T E  O F  M I C H I G A N
C O U R T  O F  A P P E A L S

EUIHYUNG KIM and IN SOOK KIM,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v

JP MORGAN CHASE BANK,
Defendant-Appellee.

EXCERPT:

Therefore, pursuant to the plain language of MCL 600.3204(3), defendant was required
to record its mortgage interest before the sheriff’s sale. Because defendant failed to do so, it was
not statutorily authorized to proceed with the sale. See MCL 600.3204(3) (“If the party
foreclosing a mortgage by advertisement is not the original mortgagee, a record chain of title
shall exist prior to the date of sale . . . .” [Emphasis added]); see also Davenport v HSBC Bank
USA, 275 Mich App 344, 347-348; 739 NW2d 383 (2007) (“Because defendant lacked the
statutory authority to foreclose, the foreclosure proceedings were void ab initio.”) Accordingly,
the trial court erred by granting summary disposition for defendant and denying plaintiffs’
motion for summary disposition when they were entitled to set aside the sheriff’s deed. Given
our resolution of this issue, it is unnecessary to address plaintiffs’ argument that the trial court
erred by prematurely disposing of their cause of action without permitting discovery.
[ipaper docId=78488254 access_key=key-230vn08yym7yezdbawli height=600 width=600 /]

Comments

comments