Bank of New York Mellon v. Chase
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION Docket No. RE-13 -03 STATE OF MAINE CUMBERLAND, ss. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, as Trustee Plaintiff ORDER V. c/Jf'/'Jber/ 0!=' M. s,A.,t i3f7d Ss C KAREN CHASE, et al. Defendants F£a I RE 'A.!fVt 1 er1,;· s Offiee a20,s C£:1v1::o As set forth at the hearing on the record today, attended by counsel for Nationstar Mortgage LLC and counsel for defendants, the court orders as follows: 1. Without objection Nationstar Mortgage LLC shall be substituted as the plaintiff in this action, as it has now been confirmed that Nationstar became both the servicer and the owner of the mortgage loan in question at least as of March 25, 2015. 2. Nationstar has adopted the previous motion filed on February 25, 2015 on behalf of the prior owner of the loan, Bank of New York Mellon, to dismiss this action without prejudice. Because a loan modification that has been pending in one form or another since at least December 2014 has now finally been signed and is acceptable to all parties, the court intends to grant that motion once it has ruled on the pending motion for sanctions. 3. Two other motions are pending. The first is a motion by counsel for Nationstar for an extension to respond to the issue of whether Nationstar should be substituted as plaintiff. That motion is now moot. 4. The other motion is a motion by the Schechtman Halperin firm to withdraw on the basis that a conflict might exist. The motion states that the Schechtman Halperin firm was seeking to withdraw from representing "plaintiff," without specifying whether it was seeking to withdraw from representing BNY Mellon or Nationstar or both. Since the firm had been representing both at the December 4 hearing, the court interprets the motion as a request to - withdraw from representing both, apparently because of a perceived possibility of conflict raised by the court's question as to whether any sanctions should be apportioned sanctions between BNY Mellon and Nationstar. 5. The court believes no conflict would exist unless Nationstar wishes to argue that any sanctions should be imposed on BNY Mellon and/or BNY Mellon wishes to argue the contrary. No such argument was made on December 4 - Ms. Johnson opposed sanctions generally without drawing any distinctions between BNY Mellon (and/or its servicer Bank of America) and Nationstar. Based on the discussion at today's hearing, moreover, the court is persuaded that it should not formally apportion any sanctions between BNY Mellon and Nationstar. 1 Any sanctions should be imposed upon plaintiff (now Nationstar) without prejudice to Nationstar' s ability to seek contribution or indemnity from any other party, either contractually or otherwise. 6. The Schechtman Halperin firm's motion to withdraw is granted. I Nationstar purchased or otherwise obtained the loan in question at a time when at least one notice of noncompliance had been filed and at a time when it could have ascertained the status of the foreclosure action and the various missteps by the prior servicer. It therefore took the loan subject to any potential sanctions that might be imposed. It bears emphasis that a significant percentage of the problems experienced with foreclosures results from what the Law Court has described "a byzantine mass of assignments and transfers" spawned by the financial services industry and the practice of securitizing mortgage loans . Homeward Residential v. Gregor, 2015 ME 108 ~ 13 , 122 A.3d 947 . The transfer of the loan in this case at a very inopportune time - while a foreclosure action was pending, while there has been a series of missteps in the loan modification process, and while at least one notice of noncompliance had already been issued - is only one example. 2 The entry shall be: Nationstar Mortgage LLC shall be substituted as the plaintiff in this case. The motion by the Schechtman Halperin firm to withdraw is granted effective today. The clerk is directed to incorporate this order in the docket by reference pursuant to Rule 79(a). Dated: February 17, 2015 ~ Thomas D. Warr en Justice, Superior Court 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
