In a monumental and overdue shift in foreclosure jurisprudence, in Finch v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 2024 ME 2,—A.3d—, the Law Court overruled its holding in Pushard v. Bank of America, N.A., 2017 ME 230, 175 A.3d 103, which effectively granted free houses to borrowers when a lender failed to strictly comply with the statutory requirements for a notice of default codified in 14 M.R.S. § 6111.

After requesting supplemental briefing from the parties in the Finch matter and a companion case addressing the Court’s foreclosure jurisprudence, J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. v. Camille J. Moulton, Law Court Dkt. No. Oxf-21-412 (argued Nov. 1, 2022), which has yet to issue from the Court, the Law Court overruled Pushard to the extent it held that the acceleration of a note balance can occur without a lender having proved (and not just alleged in its complaint) that it complied with the statutory and contractual obligations to accelerate the amount due on the note, including the express limitations codified in 14 M.R.S. § 6111. The decision in Finch effectively ends what the Court deemed the “court-as-casino” rule of Pushard.

Both Finch and Moulton involved defective section 6111 notices of default and trial court judgments for the borrowers declaring, as required by Pushard, that the notes and mortgages were unenforceable and that the banks were required to discharge the mortgages.

To continue reading the rest of the article, please click on the source link below:

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/maine-law-court-reverses-rule-barring-foreclosure-after-deficient-notice-default