Here is a look back at some of the top real estate and secured lending developments from 2017 covered here at Money and Dirt:
- The 2016 California Supreme Court opinion Yvanova v. New Century Mortgage Corporation, which initially gave hope to wrongful foreclosure plaintiffs challenging prior sloppy assignments of their loans, continued to “lose its mojo” in 2017, as more recent opinions from California Courts of Appeal limited the scope of Yvanova by holding that defective loan assignments are normally only voidable by the parties to the assignment (not void) and borrowers lack standing to challenge them. See prior post here: Has Yvanova Lost Its Mojo For Wrongful Foreclosure Plaintiffs?
- The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that filing bankruptcy is not a borrower antidote to paying default interest on a loan. See prior post here: Bankruptcy Is Not A Borrower Antidote For Loan “Default Interest”
- California courts re-stated the obvious: due to California’s statute of frauds, real estate brokers must get commission agreements in writing. See prior post here: “Broker Beware” — Get Commission Agreements In Writing
- Several opinions highlighted the dangers of relying on a void judgment (or other instrument) to establish title or priority. See prior posts here: Even a “Bona Fide Purchaser” Can’t Rely on a Void Judgment and here: A Void Default Judgment Is No Way To Establish Title
- In a case providing the year’s most viewed post on Money and Dirt, the court’s ruling demonstrated that sometimes LLC managers have the power to bind the LLC to obligations that may not be in the LLC’s best interests. See prior post here: Just How Much Power Does Your LLC’s Manager Have?
- Several Court of Appeal opinions addressed the evolving law regarding easements in California. See prior posts here: Adverse Possession of an Easement: Mistakes, Gates, and Fences, and here: Equitable Easement Without Preexisting Use?
- Opinions in the realm of eminent domain and inverse condemnation provided new guidance for how to value “different” property for which there is only a recently developed market, and the ability of inverse condemnation plaintiffs to rely on land use regulations that are not the “final say” to show a regulatory taking. See prior posts here: Valuation Of “Different” Property In Condemnation — Does a Developed Market Exist? and here: Court Issues New Opinion on Regulatory Takings and “Klopping Damages”
- California enacted a new regulatory framework for medical and recreational cannabis, with implications on real estate leasing. See prior post here: California Enacts New Regulatory Framework for Medical and Recreational Cannabis
- One opinion clarified that many foreclosure-related problems are not covered by title insurance. See prior post here: Title Insurance Covers That Foreclosure Problem, Right?
- A Court of Appeal opinion created a split of authority in California regarding what remedies are available to a lender who holds both a senior and junior deed of trust on the same security property. See prior post here: When the Same Lender Has Both a Senior and Junior Deed of Trust….
Happy New Year!