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. Paul Ogden doing a fine job of remembering his peer Gary Welsh with the post below and a call for an Indy gettogether to celebrate Gary .... http://www.ogdenonpolitics.com/2016/05/indiana-loses-citizen-journalist-giant.html Castaways of Indiana, unite!

  2. It's unfortunate that someone has attempted to hijack the comments to promote his own business. This is not an article discussing the means of preserving the record; no matter how it's accomplished, ethics and impartiality are paramount concerns. When a party to litigation contracts directly with a reporting firm, it creates, at the very least, the appearance of a conflict of interest. Court reporters, attorneys and judges are officers of the court and must abide by court rules as well as state and federal laws. Parties to litigation have no such ethical responsibilities. Would we accept insurance companies contracting with judges? This practice effectively shifts costs to the party who can least afford it while reducing costs for the party with the most resources. The success of our justice system depends on equal access for all, not just for those who have the deepest pockets.

  3. As a licensed court reporter in California, I have to say that I'm sure that at some point we will be replaced by speech recognition. However, from what I've seen of it so far, it's a lot farther away than three years. It doesn't sound like Mr. Hubbard has ever sat in a courtroom or a deposition room where testimony is being given. Not all procedures are the same, and often they become quite heated with the ends of question and beginning of answers overlapping. The human mind can discern the words to a certain extent in those cases, but I doubt very much that a computer can yet. There is also the issue of very heavy accents and mumbling. People speak very fast nowadays, and in order to do that, they generally slur everything together, they drop or swallow words like "the" and "and." Voice recognition might be able to produce some form of a transcript, but I'd be very surprised if it produces an accurate or verbatim transcript, as is required in the legal world.

  4. Really enjoyed the profile. Congratulations to Craig on living the dream, and kudos to the pros who got involved to help him realize the vision.

  5. Why in the world would someone need a person to correct a transcript when a realtime court reporter could provide them with a transcript (rough draft) immediately?

ADVERTISEMENT