Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corportation v. Hitchcock

CourtSuperior Court of Maine
DecidedJuly 13, 2016
DocketCUMre-14-70
StatusUnpublished

This text of Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corportation v. Hitchcock (Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corportation v. Hitchcock) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corportation v. Hitchcock, (Me. Super. Ct. 2016).

Opinion

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CUMBERLAND, SS CIVIL ACTION Docket No. RE-14-70

FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION, ST.A T:: o r:- MArN Cu mber,6 -~ .. , E: -, " ~"' C'erk's Office Plaintiff JUL 1,.a 2016 v. RE Cc. /VEO EDWARD HITCHCOCK, LINDA JUDGMENT OF HITCHCOCK, and CITIZENS FORECLOSURE AND SALE LENDING GROUP, INC. , Title to Real Estate Is Involved Defendants 88 Alba Street, Portland, Maine and Cumberland County Registry of Deeds, Book 24480, Page 114 TOWN AND COUNTRY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION,

Party in Interest

Before the court is plaintiff's post-trial brief in support of its proposed judgment of

foreclosure. For the following reasons, judgment is entered in favor of plaintiff.

I. FACTS

On September 29, 2006, Edward and Linda Hitchcock executed and delivered a note in

the amount of $166,000.00 to Citizens Lending Group, Inc. (Citizens). The note was secured by

a mortgage on real property located at 88 Alba Street in Portland. On October 23 , 2013 , Quicken

Loans, Inc., plaintiff's servicer, sent the Hitchcocks a notice stating that the Hitchcocks were in

default as of September 1, 2013 . On January 2, 2014, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems,

Inc. (MERS), acting as nominee for Citizens, assigned the mortgage to Quicken Loans.

Quicken Loans so_ught a judgment of foreclosure by complaint filed February 27, 2014.

The Hitchcocks were served in Auburndale, Florida on March 4, 2014, but have not answered

1 the complaint or otherwise appeared in this action. Trial was scheduled for September 3, 2014,

however Quicken Loans moved to continue following the Law Court's decision in Bank ofAm.

v. Greenleaf, 2014 ME 89, 96 A. 3d 700. On February 17, 2015 , Quicken Loans amended its

complaint, with leave of court. The amended complaint added one count of declaratory judgment

against Citizens, which sought a judgment that Quicken Loans owned the mortgage and had

standing to foreclose . The Hitchcocks were served with the amended complaint on April 9, 201 5.

Quicken Loans filed a return of service for Cit.izens on May 4, 2015 , which indicated that

National Registered Agents, Inc. was served on behalf of Citizens on April 23 , 2015 . On May

28, 2015 , Quicken Loans assigned the mortgage to plaintiff. On June 12, 2015 , plaintiff was

substituted as plaintiff in place of Quicken Loans. Plaintiff moved for a default judgment on the

declaratory judgment count on November 12, 2015 . Trial was held on December 3, 2015 .

Plaintiff filed a post-trial brief in support of its requests for declaratory judgment and a judgment

of foreclosure on March 3, 2016.

Also on March 3, 2016, plaintiff filed a motion for enlargement of time to file a return of

service for Citizens. Plaintiff asserted that, in September 2015 , National Registered Agents had

sent a letter stating that it was unable to receive documents on behalf of Citizens due to lack of a

forwarding address. Because the letter was sent to the wrong address, plaintiffs attorney was

unaware of the issue until February 2016 . The court granted the motion on March 10, 20 16. On

May 23 , 2016, plaintiff filed a return of service for Citizens, which showed that Citizens was

served in hand on March 1, 2016 . On June 14, 2016, plaintiff moved to dismiss the declaratory

judgment count on the ground that Citizens had executed a quitclaim assignment, dated June 8,

2016, purporting to assign to plaintiff any interest it held in the mortgage.

2 I~

II. DISCUSSION

To obtain a judgment of foreclosure, the mortgagee must establish: the existence of a

mortgage, including the property description and book and page number of its recording; proof

of ownership of the note and mortgage, including all assignments and endorsements; a breach of

condition in the mortgage ; the amount due, including any reasonable attorney ' s fees and court

costs; the order of priority and any amounts that may be due to other parties in interest; evidence

of a properly served notice of default and the mortgagor's right to cure; proof of completed

mediation; and, if the mortgagor has not appeared, a statement as to whether the mortgagor is in

military service. Chase Home Fin. LLC v. Higgins, 2009 ME 136, 111 , 985 A.2d 508.

1. Existence of Mortgage

Plaintiff has provided the mortgage, which contains a property description, street address,

and book and page number of recording. (Pl.'s Ex. B.)

2. Ownership of Note

The mortgagee may certify proof of ownership of the note by establishing that it is in

possession of the note, and the note is endorsed in blank. Bank ofAm. v. Cloutier, 2013 ME 17, 1

18, 61 A.3d 1242. Plaintiff has provided the note and an allonge, which contains an endorsement

from Citizens to Flagstar Bank, and an endorsement in blank from Flagstar. 1 (Pl. ' s Ex. A.)

3. Ownership of Mortgage

When MERS acts solely as nominee, an assignment from MERS transfers only the right

to record the mortgage as nominee. Greenleaf, 2014 ME 89, 1116-17, 96 A.3d 700 . The

assignments in this case show that MERS , acting as nominee for Citizens, assigned the mortgage

I The note itself contains a separate endorsement to Flagstar, which is stamped with "NOTE ENDORSEMENT VOID ." To the extent that the voided endorsement raises questions about the validity of the endorsements on the allonge, the quitclaim assignment, discussed below, resolves those questions in favor of plaintiffs ownership.

3 from Citizens to Quicken Loans. (Pl. 's Ex. C.) To remedy this issue, plaintiff has provided a

quitclaim assignment from Citizens. (Ex. A to Mot. Dismiss.) The Law Court has indicated that a

quitclaim assignment from the original lender to the plaintiff is sufficient to establish the

plaintiffs ownership of the mortgage. See Nationstar Mortg. , LLC v. Halfacre, 2016 ME 97, ~ 6,

_ A.3d _ ("We recognize that the trial court apparently was not presented with the Fannie Mae

quitclaim assignment, and therefore that the trial court had no reason to question the quitclaim

assignment to Nationstar and the representations of counsel that Nationstar's assignment was

effective."). Plaintiff therefore has standing and is entitled to a judgment of foreclosure if it can

establish the remaining elements. See Greenleaf, 2014 ME 89, ~ 9, 96 A.3d 700.

4. Breach

At trial, plaintiff moved to admit records of the Hitchcock's payment history with

Quicken Loans. (Pl. 's Ex. E.) To establish the records ' admissibility, plaintiff offered the

testimony of Kristin Wykowski, an employee of Quicken Loans. Ms. Wykowski's testimony

established that: ( 1) the records were made at or near the time by someone with knowledge; (2)

the records were kept in the course of Quicken Loans ' s regularly conducted activities; (3)

making the records was a regular practice of those activities; (4) Ms. Wykowski was the

custodian of the records; and (5) neither the source of information nor the method or

circumstances of preparation indicate a lack of trustworthiness. M.R. Evid. 803(6); see HSBC

Mortg. Servs. v. Murphy, 2011 ME 59, ~ 10, 19 A.3d 815. The payment history records are

therefore admitted. The records and testimony at trial establish that the Hitchcocks failed to

make the September 1, 2013 payment and have not made any payments since that time.

4 5.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Chase Home Finance LLC v. Higgins
2009 ME 136 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2009)
HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Gabay
2011 ME 101 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2011)
HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc. v. Murphy
2011 ME 59 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2011)
Bank of America, N.A. v. James A. Cloutier
2013 ME 17 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2013)
Bank of American, N.A. v. Scott A. Greenleaf
2014 ME 89 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2014)
Nationstar Mortgage LLC v. Timothy E. Halfacre
2016 ME 97 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corportation v. Hitchcock, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-home-loan-mortgage-corportation-v-hitchcock-mesuperct-2016.