IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ADRIAN LUPU
Plaintiff

v.

LOAN CITY, LLC, et al.
Defendants

ORDER

excerpt:
Claims Alleging Violation of Pennsylvania Statues Requiring Recording of Mortgages Plaintiff alleges that the title to the Plaintiff’s property has been clouded through the use of MERS instead of the Chester County office of the Recorder of Deeds, which means that there is no public record of the mortgage assignments. Plaintiff seeks to quiet title to the property.

Under Pennsylvania law, as is relevant here, an action to quiet title “may be brought…to determine any right, lien, title or interest in the land or determine the validity or discharge of any document, obligation or deed affecting any right, lien, title or interest in land; [or] to compel an adverse party to file, record, cancel, surrender or satisfy of record, or admit the validity, invalidity or discharge of, any document, obligation or deed affecting any right, lien, title or interest in land….” In Montgomery County v MERSCORP, Inc., the County alleged that use of MERS and the resulting failure to record mortgage assignments with the County and to pay the required fee violates Pennsylvania’s recording statue. In denying a motion to dismiss, Chief Judge Joyner held that “Pennsylvania law permits any person in any manner interested in a conveyance, such as a mortgage assignment, to bring a quiet title action…to compel the person with this analysis and holds that Plaintiff here stated a claim under Pennsylvania law to the extent he seeks an action to quiet title, through the Counts alleging “Violation of Local Statues” (Count Five); and “MERS Not Mortgagee” (Count Six).

[…]

[ipaper docId=140716403 access_key=key-1nl5vccew1828fdh4qhm height=600 width=600 /]