Opinion ID: 4540036
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Foreclosure Action

Text: [¶6] A bench trial was held on August 16, 2018. Among other things, Beedle objected to U.S. Bank’s introduction of the 2012 assignment to Assignee #1. Pointing to BOA’s signature as Fleet’s successor by merger on the 2012 assignment, Beedle’s attorney stated: I assume the Court is aware successor by merger, which would indicate that in 2012, when this was assigned [by] Fleet Bank, Fleet National Bank did not exist, and while the signature is done by Bank of America successor by merger, the assignment itself is by Fleet National Bank, which didn’t exist, which could not have Given its conclusion that U.S. Bank did not own the mortgage because the first assignment was 2 ineffective, the court did not reach Beedle’s assertion that the second assignment was unenforceable. 4 assigned anything at that point. Therefore, the assignment is not valid and I don't think it should be admitted. Counsel for U.S. Bank responded by explaining, inter alia, that “Fleet National Bank is the entity named in the mortgage, Bank of America has authority, as successor by merger to Fleet National Bank, and is therefore the one that executed the assignment. . . . Bank of America, as successor by merger, has the authority to execute assignments on an assumed entit[y’s] behalf.” Beedle’s attorney disagreed, stating: Well, there’s no evidence of any of that, Your Honor. What this is, is an assignment from Fleet National Bank to [Assignee #1] . . . . Fleet National Bank did not own the mortgage at the time because it became part of Bank of America, as is evidenced by the signature. If it’s required for the signature, it’s required for the assignor. It’s not the proper assignor, therefore this transfers nothing.[3] (Emphasis added.) The court reserved ruling on the admissibility of the 2012 assignment, as well as certain other evidence introduced by U.S. Bank. The record was left open, but U.S. Bank did not present any additional evidence relating to BOA’s merger with Fleet. [¶7] In an order entered on January 16, 2019, after the parties filed written summations, the District Court found that U.S. Bank “failed [to] meet 3 It appears Beedle’s argument was that the assignment was invalid based solely on the fact that it states “Fleet National Bank . . . hereby assigns to [Assignee #1] all Assignor’s right, title and interest in and to the [Beedle] mortgage,” instead of reading “Bank of America hereby assigns . . . .” 5 its burden of proving ownership of the mortgage due to a faulty [2012] assignment.” The court explained: In the first assignment [of] record in this case, Bank of America’s agent as successor by merger would have authority to assign right, title and interest in the mortgage only if the assignor actually owned the right, title, and interest it purported to assign. Without any evidence establishing the occurrence of the merger and what interests, if any, in the mortgage were actually transferred, there is a break in the chain of ownership of the mortgage. . . . Proof of the merger is the missing link in the ownership chain because without it, the court cannot conclude what right, title or interest, if any, in the mortgage was transferred from Fleet National Bank to [Assignee #1]. (Emphases in original.) As a result, the court concluded that U.S. Bank failed to prove ownership of the mortgage and therefore lacked standing to foreclose on the property. The court entered judgment in favor of Beedle.4 [¶8] U.S. Bank filed a motion to reconsider, see M.R. Civ. P. 59, arguing that the court should have taken judicial notice of Fleet’s merger with BOA or, alternatively, dismissed the complaint without prejudice. U.S. Bank attached two documents to its motion as proof of the merger, including an affidavit signed by an assistant secretary of BOA stating that Fleet had merged into BOA on June 13, 2005, and a copy of Fleet National Bank’s institution history 4 See infra note 5. 6 page from the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council’s website, which also showed that Fleet had merged into BOA. [¶9] The court denied U.S. Bank’s motion to reconsider on April 4, 2019, and U.S. Bank timely appealed. M.R. App. P. 2B(c)(2)(D).