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 homeowner signed a promissory note with First Magnus Financial Corporation and a mortgage contract with Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) as nominee for First Magnus, pledging their home as collateral. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP (BAC) filed a foreclosure complaint against the homeowner, attaching an unendorsed copy of the note and an unrecorded assignment of the mortgage from MERS to BAC. The homeowner contested BAC's ownership of the note and mortgage (paras 2-3).

Procedural History

• District Court of Lincoln County, Karen L. Parsons, District Judge: Awarded summary judgment in favor of BAC, ordering a foreclosure sale.

Parties' Submissions

• Appellee (BAC): Argued that it had standing to foreclose based on an affidavit stating BAC was the holder of the homeowner's note and an unrecorded assignment of the mortgage from MERS to BAC (paras 3, 10).
• Appellant (Homeowner): Contested BAC's standing to foreclose, arguing BAC failed to establish its ownership of the note and mortgage. Additionally, the homeowner argued that BAC failed to provide adequate notice of and opportunity to cure the default and erred in granting summary judgment on his counterclaims (para 1).

Legal Issues

• Whether BAC had standing to foreclose at the time it filed its complaint for foreclosure (para 6).
• Whether BAC provided adequate notice of and opportunity to cure the default before filing for foreclosure (para 6).
• Whether the district court erred in granting summary judgment on the homeowner's counterclaims (para 6).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals of New Mexico reversed the district court's award of summary judgment in favor of BAC, holding that BAC failed to establish that it had standing to foreclose when it filed its complaint for foreclosure (para 17).

Reasons

• Per M. Monica Zamora, J. (James J. Wechsler, J., Timothy L. Garcia, J., concurring): The court found that BAC did not demonstrate it had the right to enforce the note and the right to foreclose the mortgage at the time the complaint for foreclosure was filed. The court emphasized that standing in foreclosure actions is a jurisdictional prerequisite and must be established at the time the suit is filed. The court noted that possession of an unendorsed note made payable to a third party does not establish the right of enforcement. The court also found that the affidavit provided by BAC, executed nearly three years after the complaint was filed, did not establish BAC's timely ownership of the note since it did not demonstrate personal knowledge of the note's transfer to BAC prior to filing the foreclosure complaint. The court rejected BAC's arguments that previous decisions setting requirements for establishing standing should not apply retroactively to this case, stating that these decisions did not establish new principles of law or reach resolutions that were not foreshadowed (paras 6-16).