CRL’s amicus brief in support of bankrupt homeowners in 18 cases appealed by Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS), in which the Nevada bankruptcy court determined that loan owners must disclose their identity, rather than using MERS’ name, when seeking the bankruptcy court’s permission to foreclose on homeowners who have filed for bankruptcy. MERS is a company created by the mortgage industry to electronically track the ownership of loans, as a way of avoiding the need to report loan ownership changes in official local government records. The existence of MERS makes it difficult for homeowners to know who owns their loan, which can be essential information to borrowers seeking modifications or with legal claims about their loan. The brief argues that MERS, as opposed to the loan owners, lacks the standing and real-party-in-interest status necessary to seek a federal court’s permission to foreclose. It also argues that MERS did not submit sufficient proof in the cases on appeal to entitle it—or anybody else—to deprive homeowners of their fundamental right under bankruptcy laws to stop foreclosure proceedings.

CRL's brief on behalf of the petitioners seeking certiorari from the United States Supreme Court in Andrews v. Chevy Chase Bank. CRL represents a Wisconsin couple, who was one of thousands of borrowers who received identical disclosure statements for Chevy Chase Bank payment option adjustment rate mortgages that violated the Truth in Lending Act. CRL asks the Supreme Court to review the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit that lawsuit seeking to rescind their loan based on Truth in Lending Act violations cannot proceed as class actions.

CRL's brief on behalf of the petitioners seeking certiorari from the United States Supreme Court in Andrews v. Chevy Chase Bank. CRL represents a Wisconsin couple, who was one of thousands of borrowers who received identical disclosure statements for Chevy Chase Bank payment option adjustment rate mortgages that violated the Truth in Lending Act. CRL asks the Supreme Court to review the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit that lawsuit seeking to rescind their loan based on Truth in Lending Act violations cannot proceed as class actions.

CRL's amicus briefs in support of the New York Attorney General in Cuomo v. The Clearing House Association, L.L.P. CRL, along with a number of consumer groups, argues that the National Bank Act's "visitorial powers" provision does not prohibit the New York Attorney General from enforcing the state's anti-discrimination law against national banks concerning their mortgage lending practices, and that the Office of the Comptroller of Currency's regulation treating this as prohibited is invalid. CRL participated in this case before the U.S. District Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court.

CRL's brief on behalf of the appellees in Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Knox. CRL represents Mississippi homeowners whose mortgage lender sought a federal court order staying the homeowners' state court predatory lending lawsuit in this appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. The district court refused to order the stay pursuant to the federal Anti-Arbitration Act.

CRL's brief on behalf of the appellee in HSBC Bank, USA v. Dammond. CRL represents a New York homeowner who sought relief from a foreclosure judgment because the mortgage assignment filed by the bank showed it lacked standing at the time it filed the foreclosure action in this appeal in the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division, Second Department. The trial court granted the relief.

CRL's amicus brief in support of the Massachusetts Attorney General in Commonwealth v. Fremont Investment & Loan. CRL, along with a number of other consumer groups, argues in favor of affirming the trial court's injunction of foreclosures by Fremont on loans with a set of characteristics (including "teaser rates" and prepayment penalties) that were unsustainable over the long-term without continued refinancings dependant on continued increases in property values in this appeal before the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The brief explains the dangers created by each of the problematic loan features identified by the trial court. The Supreme Judicial Court in December 2008 ruled in favor of the Attorney General in an opinion found at 897 N.E.2d 548.

CRL's briefs on behalf of the appellants in Johnson v. Washington. CRL represents Virginia homeowners who signed a deed purporting to sell their house to an investor in a foreclosure rescue scam when they went to a mortgage broker to refinance their defaulted loan in this appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. The district court held the mortgage rescue transaction neither created an equitable mortgage, in which case the federal Truth in Lending Act and state mortgage broker laws would apply, nor constituted fraud.

CRL's pleadings and briefs on behalf of the plaintiffs in Jackson v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. CRL represents a class of Minnesota homeowners facing foreclosure who allege that MERS' failure to record all transfers in the ownership of their loans before beginning the foreclosure process violates procedural requirements in the state's non-judicial foreclosure statutes concerning the recordation of mortgage assignments. This case was filed in the Minnesota state courts, removed to the U.S. District Court, and certified to the Minnesota Supreme Court.

CRL's briefs on behalf of the appellants in Johnson v. Washington. CRL represents Virginia homeowners who signed a deed purporting to sell their house to an investor in a foreclosure rescue scam when they went to a mortgage broker to refinance their defaulted loan in this appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. The district court held the mortgage rescue transaction neither created an equitable mortgage, in which case the federal Truth in Lending Act and state mortgage broker laws would apply, nor constituted fraud.