Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Erobobo

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reversing the trial court’s ruling that the trustee’s acceptance of the note and mortgage after the trust’s closing date and directly from sponsor were void under the same New York statute cited by Appellants herein
• defendant waived lack of standing defense by failing tt> raise it in defendant’s answer or pre-motion to dismiss
• “[A] mortgagor whose loan is owned by a trust[] does not have standing to challenge the [] possession or status as assignee of the note and mortgage based on 23 |
• “[A] mortgagor whose loan is owned by a trust[] does not have standing to challenge the [assignee’s] possession or status as assignee of the note and mortgage based on purported noncompliance with certain provisions of the PSA.”
• “[A] mortgagor whose loan is owned by a trust[] does not have standing to challenge the . . . possession or status as assignee of the note and mortgage based on purported noncompliance with certain provisions of the [pooling and servicing agreement].”
• calling Saldivar and Glaski rejected outliers

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).