AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves a homeowner, Lee Ross Benavidez, who appealed from the district court's order denying his motion to vacate related to a mortgage dispute. The core of the dispute appears to center around the standing of Bank of America, as the successor by merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing LP, formerly known as Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, to enforce the mortgage against Benavidez. The bank's standing was challenged based on its possession of the original note indorsed in blank and a valid mortgage assignment, particularly focusing on the role and authority of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) in assigning the mortgage rights.

Procedural History

• Appeal from the District Court of Bernalillo County, Valerie A. Huling, District Judge, January 7, 2016: The district court denied the homeowner's motion to vacate.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellant (Homeowner): Challenged the MERS assignment and questioned MERS' authority to assign the rights to enforce the mortgage without definitive instruction from a principal.
• Appellee (Bank of America): Argued that it established its standing as a holder in due course of the note through possession of the original note indorsed in blank at the time of the complaint filing and had a valid mortgage assignment.

Legal Issues

• Whether Bank of America had standing as a holder in due course of the note based on possession of the original note indorsed in blank and a valid mortgage assignment.
• Whether challenges to the standing based on the validity of a mortgage assignment by MERS were valid.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision denying the homeowner's motion to vacate.

Reasons

• Per J. Miles Hanisee, with Michael D. Bustamante and Timothy L. Garcia, Judges, concurring:
  The Court proposed to affirm the district court's decision based on Bank of America's established standing as a holder in due course of the note, supported by possession of the original note indorsed in blank and a valid mortgage assignment (paras 2-3).
  The Court rejected challenges to the bank's standing based on the validity of the mortgage assignment by MERS, referencing case law that supports the authority of MERS to assign mortgage rights (para 2).
  The homeowner's memorandum in opposition was found to be unresponsive to the Court's proposed disposition, failing to address the case law or provide citations to support his arguments against the MERS assignment's validity (para 3).
  The decision to affirm was based on the homeowner's inability to clearly point out errors in fact or law in the notice of proposed disposition and his failure to supply citations to either case law or the record to support his arguments (para 3).