Pushard v. Bank of America N.A. | Plaintiffs were entitled, as a matter of law, to the declaratory relief they sought. ... We therefore must vacate the judgment in the Bank's favor on the Pushard s' claim for declaratory relief and remand the case to the trial court to enter a judgment declaring that the note and mortgage are unenforceable and that the Pushards hold title to their property free and clear of the Bank's mortgage encumbrance

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Pushard v. Bank of America N.A. | Plaintiffs were entitled, as a matter of law, to the declaratory relief they sought. … We therefore must vacate the judgment in the Bank’s favor on the Pushard s’ claim for declaratory relief and remand the case to the trial court to enter a judgment declaring that the note and mortgage are unenforceable and that the Pushards hold title to their property free and clear of the Bank’s mortgage encumbrance

Pushard v. Bank of America N.A. | Plaintiffs were entitled, as a matter of law, to the declaratory relief they sought. … We therefore must vacate the judgment in the Bank’s favor on the Pushard s’ claim for declaratory relief and remand the case to the trial court to enter a judgment declaring that the note and mortgage are unenforceable and that the Pushards hold title to their property free and clear of the Bank’s mortgage encumbrance

Pushard v. Bank of America N.A.

Court: Maine Supreme Judicial Court

Citation: 2017 ME 230

Opinion Date: December 12, 2017

Judge: Humphrey

Areas of Law: Banking, Real Estate & Property Law

In this appeal arising from a foreclosure action, the Supreme Judicial Court vacated the judgment in favor of Bank on Plaintiffs’ claim for declaratory relief and remanded the case for entry of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiffs on that claim. Plaintiffs filed claims against Bank for declaratory and injunctive relief, slander of title, and damages pursuant to Me. Rev. Stat. 33, 551. The business and consumer docket entered judgment in favor of Bank. The Supreme Judicial Court affirmed in part and vacated in part, holding (1) Plaintiffs’ claims presented a justiciable controversy; (2) the trial court did not err by granting Bank’s motion for summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ section 551 claim or slander-of-title claim; but (3) Plaintiffs were entitled, as a matter of law, to the declaratory relief they sought.

 

25
[¶36 ]    Because  the  Bank  is  precluded  from  seeking  to  recover  on  the  note or enforce the mort gage , the  Pushards are entitled, as a matter of law, to  the declaratory relief they seek.  We therefore must vacate the judgment in  the Bank’s favor on the Pushard s’ claim for declaratory relief and remand the  case  to  the  trial  court  to enter  a  judgment  declaring  that  the  note  and  mortgage are unenforceable and that the Pushards hold title to their property  free and clear of the Bank’s mortgage encumbrance .
.
© 2010-18 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Comments

comments

This post was written by:

- who has written 9127 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA.

CONTROL FRAUD | ‘If you don’t look; you don’t find, Wherever you look; you will find’ -William Black

Contact the author

Leave a Reply

GARY DUBIN LAW OFFICES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HAWAII and CALIFORNIA
Advertise your business on StopForeclosureFraud.com

Archives