Maryland intermediate appellate court reaffirms that there is no statute of limitations applicable to the foreclosures of mortgages. 2014 Amendments to statute of limitations confirmed that foreclosure proceedings were not subject to the 12-year limitations period, and was part of a statutory scheme to reduce the limitations period for post-foreclosure deficiency proceedings to three years.
Buyer in a real estate transaction who is duped by fraudulent wiring instructions is not owed a duty by the transferee/recipient bank of the wire transfer: No duty to the sender/buyer to properly verify the identity of the person who opened the recipient bank account, nor a duty to take “preventable steps” before permitting the withdrawal of a large amount of funds from the newly opened bank account.
The U.S. Supreme Court held that “those who engage in only nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings are not debt collectors within the meaning of the [FDCPA],” save for § 1692f(6), which prohibits certain conduct in “effect[ing] dispossession or disablement of property.” On the other hand, the bulk of the FDPCA’s prohibitions, including § 1692g(b)’s verification requirement, did not apply to such foreclosure firm.
The Court of Appeals of Maryland determined that, after a foreclosure sale, commercial real estate brokers could not enforce a covenant to pay renewal leasing commissions against the new owner, because the right to renewal commissions were personal obligations of the Original Owner/Landlord, which did not run with the land.
The Supreme Court of Virginia held that a deed’s legal description referring to a boundary road, includes title to the center line of the road, unless a contrary intent is shown. A description of the square footage of the property that excluded the area of the road did not show a contrary intent, because square footage is the least certain mode of describing land, which must yield to a description by boundaries and distances.
The Supreme Court of Maryland provides a historical and legal overview of the law of burial grounds in the United States to determined that compliance with a state quiet title statute for such sale was not mandatory. The Court held that equitable considerations remain and identified five key common law principles affecting the sale of burial grounds.
The Appellate Court of Maryland determined that an assignee of the Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC) was subject to the licensing requirements under Maryland's Credit Grantor Revolving Credit Provisions, Md. Code, Comm. Law § 12-901, et seq.
However, the Court rejected challenges to the enforceability of HELOC as having merged with a prior judgment on the debt, was barred by a statute of limitations, or that Assignee lacked standing because the HELOC was non-negotiable. According to the Court, a recorded assignment of the HELOC conclusively established ownership in the Assignee.
The Appellate Court of Maryland determined that a foreclosure of a reverse mortgage did not extinguish the Lender’s right to insurance proceeds for a casualty loss that had occurred presale, up to the amount of the remaining unpaid balance. In doing so, the Court applied the “loss before foreclosure rule” to the reverse mortgage, notwithstanding the reverse mortgage’s prohibitions against collection of a deficiency judgment.
