1 lender 2 notes in Cal

From: Charles Cox [mailto:charles@bayliving.com]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 3:12 PM
To: Charles Cox
Subject: 1 lender 2 notes in Cal

In Bank of America v Mitchell (2012) 204 CA4th 1199, a lender, originally made two loans to the borrower, secured by first & second deeds of trust on the property, conducted a nonjudicial foreclosure sale on the first deed of trust after a default, and then – a year later – sold the second note to a third party, who sought to recover under it as a sold out junior, but was held barred from recovering under California’s complex antideficiency scheme. Attached is` my "Editor’s Take" on the decision in the CEB California Real Property Law Reporter of last month, which gives a brief history of the problems California attorneys confront in this area. (But stay tuned since an even more interesting variation just came down which I will report on next month

Roger Bernhardt, Professor of Law
Golden Gate University
536 Mission Street
San Francisco CA 94105-2968

Bank of America v Mitchell.doc
BofA v Mitchell.docx

Unknown's avatar

Author: timothymccandless

I have spent most of my professional life helping people who were being taken advantage of by systems they did not fully understand. As an attorney, I represented consumers against predatory lending practices and worked in elder law protecting seniors from fraud. My family lost $239,145 to identity theft, which became the foundation for my seniorgard.onlime and deepened my commitment to financial education. Since 2008, I have maintained a blog at timothymccandless.wordpress.com providing free financial education. Not behind a paywall. Free, because financial literacy should not cost money. I trade with real money using the exact strategy described in this book. My current positions: Pfizer at $16,480 deployed generating $77,900 per year net. Verizon at $29,260 deployed generating $51,000 per year net. Combined: 293% annualized pace. These are my only active positions. Not cherry-picked.

Leave a comment