Recent case of interest regarding “note-follows-the-mortgage” presumption and “robo-signing” issues.
In this case, mortgagors who defaulted on their note sought to enjoin bank from foreclosing, contending that assignments of note and deed to bank were “robo-signed” and that the assignment only referenced the deed of trust (mortgage) and not the note. See Reinagel v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, 2013 WL 3480207 (5th Cir. 2013).
The Court held that under Texas law, the assignment of a mortgage presumptively includes the note secured by the mortgage, whether or not the assignment expressly references the note. The Court further held that the mortgagors had no basis to challenge the validity of the assignment as the mortgagors were not a party to the contract.
In dictum, the Court admonished that it does not condone ‘robo-signing’ and reminds that “bank employees or contractors who commit forgery or prepare false affidavits subject themselves and their supervisors to civil and criminal liability.”
No information in this article is intended to constitute legal advice. For specific legal advice, please contact an attorney.
If you have any questions or would like more information about the “note-follows-the-mortgage” presumption or “robo-signing”, please contact Pat Huttenbach at 713.220.9184 or email@example.com.