ILNews

7th Circuit: amendment applies to all mortgages

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A 2007 amendment allowing recorded mortgages with certain technical defects to provide constructive notice, as if the mortgages were properly recorded and acknowledged, applies to all mortgages regardless of when they were recorded, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Friday.

In what Circuit Judge Richard Cudahy described as "a puzzle of statutory interpretation," the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the U.S. District Court's reversal of the bankruptcy court ruling that held a 2007 amendment to Indiana's recording statute only applied to mortgages recorded after the amendment's effective date of July 1, 2007. A 2008 amendment added language that Indiana Code Section 32-21-4-1(c) applied regardless of when a mortgage was recorded, language that was missing in the 2007 amendment.

In dispute in the instant case is a mortgage provided by LaSalle Bank National Association's predecessor that was recorded in May 2001 but had a technical defect because it didn't identify the people who appeared before the notary and executed the mortgage document. After the debtors filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 13 in March 2008, trustee Debra Miller brought an adversary proceeding to avoid LaSalle's mortgage lien.

At issue in Debra L. Miller, trustee v. LaSalle Bank National Association, No. 09-3013, is whether before the 2008 amendment took effect, the 2007 amendment applied to purchasers of properties encumbered by certain technically deficient mortgages recorded prior to July 1, 2007.

The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals examined Indiana law on statutory interpretation and the language of the statute, and found the 2007 amendment to be ambiguous and not have a retroactive effect. It did agree with LaSalle that the relevant "retroactivity event" in this case is the attachment of the bona fide purchaser's rights.

"We do not agree with the Trustee that debtors had vested rights to the effect of technical defects at the time the mortgage was recorded. The rights of the bank and the debtors (here represented by the Trustee) vis-a-vis other creditors were determined at the time the Trustee's strong-arm powers arose," wrote Judge Cudahy. "The 2007 Amendment does change the rights of (bona fide purchasers) for purchases made after July 2007 - but that effect is clearly prospective."

Given the obvious ambiguity in the 2007 amendment and the apparent activity of the bankruptcy trustees in aggressively seeking to avoid mortgages on technical grounds even after that amendment, the 2008 amendment merely clarified the legislature's intent in 2007 that it was supposed to apply to all mortgages, whenever filed, the Circuit Court concluded.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. IF the Right to Vote is indeed a Right, then it is a RIGHT. That is the same for ALL eligible and properly registered voters. And this is, being able to cast one's vote - until the minute before the polls close in one's assigned precinct. NOT days before by absentee ballot, and NOT 9 miles from one's house (where it might be a burden to get to in time). I personally wait until the last minute to get in line. Because you never know what happens. THAT is my right, and that is Mr. Valenti's. If it is truly so horrible to let him on school grounds (exactly how many children are harmed by those required to register, on school grounds, on election day - seriously!), then move the polling place to a different location. For ALL voters in that precinct. Problem solved.

  2. "associates are becoming more mercenary. The path to partnership has become longer and more difficult so they are chasing short-term gains like high compensation." GOOD FOR THEM! HELL THERE OUGHT TO BE A UNION!

  3. Let's be honest. A glut of lawyers out there, because law schools have overproduced them. Law schools dont care, and big law loves it. So the firms can afford to underpay them. Typical capitalist situation. Wages have grown slowly for entry level lawyers the past 25 years it seems. Just like the rest of our economy. Might as well become a welder. Oh and the big money is mostly reserved for those who can log huge hours and will cut corners to get things handled. More capitalist joy. So the answer coming from the experts is to "capitalize" more competition from nonlawyers, and robots. ie "expert systems." One even hears talk of "offshoring" some legal work. thus undercutting the workers even more. And they wonder why people have been pulling for Bernie and Trump. Hello fools, it's not just the "working class" it's the overly educated suffering too.

  4. And with a whimpering hissy fit the charade came to an end ... http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2016/07/27/all-charges-dropped-against-all-remaining-officers-in-freddie-gray-case/ WHISTLEBLOWERS are needed more than ever in a time such as this ... when politics trump justice and emotions trump reason. Blue Lives Matter.

  5. "pedigree"? I never knew that in order to become a successful or, for that matter, a talented attorney, one needs to have come from good stock. What should raise eyebrows even more than the starting associates' pay at this firm (and ones like it) is the belief systems they subscribe to re who is and isn't "fit" to practice law with them. Incredible the arrogance that exists throughout the practice of law in this country, especially at firms like this one.

ADVERTISEMENT