Law Commons^™

Goliath Versus Goliath In High-Stakes Mbs Litigation, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden

David J Reiss

The loan-origination and mortgage-securitization practices between 2000 and 2007 created the housing and mortgage-backed securities bubble that precipitated the 2008 economic crisis and ensuing recession. The mess that the loan-origination and mortgage-securitization practices caused is now playing out in courts around the world. MBS investors are suing banks, MBS sponsors and underwriters for misrepresenting the quality of loans purportedly held in MBS pools and failing to properly transfer loan documents and mortgages to the pools, as required by the MBS pooling and servicing agreements. State and federal prosecutors have also filed claims against banks, underwriters and sponsors for the roles …

Show Me The Note Q&A, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden

David J Reiss

This is a Q&A relating to an article, Show Me The Note, available at http://works.bepress.com/david_reiss/63/.

"Show Me The Note" refers to a defense that seeks to forestall or prevent foreclosure by requiring the foreclosing party to produce the mortgage and the associated promissory note as proof of its right to initiate foreclosure.

Show Me The Note!, William K. Akina, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden

David J Reiss

News outlets and foreclosure defense blogs have focused attention on the defense commonly referred to as "show me the note." This defense seeks to forestall or prevent foreclosure by requiring the foreclosing party to produce the mortgage and the associated promissory note as proof of its right to initiate foreclosure.

The defense arose in two recent state supreme-court cases and is also being raised in lower courts throughout the country. It is not only important to individuals facing foreclosure but also for the mortgage industry and investors in mortgage-backed securities. In the aggregate, the body of law that develops as …

Rebalancing Public And Private In The Law Of Mortgage Transfer, John P. Hunt

John P Hunt

The law governing the United States’ $13 trillion mortgage market is broken. Courts and legislatures around the country continue to struggle with the fallout from the effort to build a 21st century global market in mortgages on a fragmented, arguably archaic legal foundation. These authorities’ struggles stem in large part from the lack of clarity about the legal requirements for mortgage transfer, the key process for contemporary mortgage finance.

We demonstrate two respects in which American mortgage transfer law is unclear and offer suggestions for fixing it. Revisions to the Uniform Commercial Code adopted around the turn of the century …

Dirty Remics, Revisited, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden

David J Reiss

We review the differences between two visions for the residential mortgage markets, one driven by the goal of efficiency and the other driven by the goals of efficiency and consumer protection. Both visions advocate for structural reform, but one advocates for industry-led change and the other advocates for input from a wider array of stakeholders. Broader input is not only important to ensure that a broad range of interests are represented but also to ensure the long-term legitimacy of the new system. This is a response to Joshua Stein, Dirt Lawyers Versus Wall Street: A Different View, PROBATE AND PROPERTY …

Dirt Lawyers And Dirty Remics: A Debate, David J. Reiss, Bradley T. Borden, Joshua Stein

David J Reiss

In mid-2013, Professors Bradley T. Borden and David J. Reiss published an article in the American Bar Association’s PROBATE & PROPERTY journal (May/June 2013, at 13), about the disconnect between the securitization process and the mechanics of mortgage assignments. The Borden/Reiss article discussed potential legal and tax issues caused by sloppiness in mortgage assignments.

Joshua Stein responded to the Borden/Reiss article, arguing that the technicalities of mortgage assignments serve no real purpose and should be eliminated. That article appeared in the November/December 2013 issue of the same publication, at 6.

Stein’s response was accompanied by a commentary from Professors Borden …