Legal Opinion
Richard Dahnken v. Wells Fargo Bank
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided July 19, 2017No. 14-15424UnpublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ***
In 2005, Appellant Richard Dahnken (“Dahnken”) obtained a $346,000 home loan, evidenced by a promissory note and secured by a deed of trust recorded against the property. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”) was designated the nominee for the lender and its successors and assigns, beneficiary of the deed of trust, and holder of legal title to the loan. Through a series of assignments, the loan was securitized into a mortgage-backed securities pool that qualified as a Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit (“REMIC”) in accordance with the Internal Revenue…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Yvanova v. New Century Mortgage Corp.California Supreme Court · 2016
- Lueras v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- Fontenot v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Mendoza v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.California Court of Appeal · 2016
- David Turner v. Wells Fargo BankCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
3Cited by1 opinion
- Barrington Investments of Arizona LLC v. US Bank National AssociationDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2020