DS News

DS News December 2021

DSNews delivers stories, ideas, links, companies, people, events, and videos impacting the mortgage default servicing industry.

Issue link: http://digital.dsnews.com/i/1433111

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 80 of 99

79 foreclosure should not have been barred by the statute of limitations. Separately, the borrower argued that the payments made could not have revived the debt since they were made in connection with the forbearance agreement and not the underlying note. Upon review, the Court of Appeals ruled that there was "no material distinction between payments applied to delinquent amounts owed on the debt and payments applied to the principle and interest; in either case the payments were applied to the debt created by the promissory note." Having concluded that the partial payments reset the statute of limitation, the Court of Appeals chose not to opine on the remaining tolling and deceleration arguments that had been fully briefed since the statutes of limitation were no longer an issue. is case provides further justification for Section 37-1-3 along with the accompanying revival provision under Section 37-1-16 to be used as the controlling statute in New Mexico judicial foreclosure cases dealing with statute of limitation issues. Additionally, it should help to further encourage loss mitigation activity by providing lenders with assurances that certain foreclosure prevention alternatives like forbearance agreements can be tollable and potentially even reset the statute of limitation clock if the loss mitigation efforts are unsuccessful. Jason Bousliman joined McCarthy & Holthus LLP in 2019 as the New Mexico Managing Partner. Bousliman is an experienced litigator with extensive expertise in all aspects of residential and commercial lending litigation, including foreclosures, contested foreclosures, bankruptcy, collections, and contracts. He has over 18 years of industry experience, including law firm management and litigating at all levels of New Mexico court. Bousliman oversees the firm's all-star team based out of the firm's Albuquerque office. Andrew J. Boylan is a Partner at McCarthy & Holthus LLP, overseeing risk management and compliance. He is also the firm's Chief Compliance Officer. After graduating from the University of San Diego, where he earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in political science and Spanish, he received his Juris Doctorate degree from the University of San Diego School of Law and his MBA from the University of San Diego Graduate School of Business Administration. He is a member of the United Trustees Association and the California Mortgage Bankers Association's Future Leaders Program. He has spoken on regulatory compliance issues at numerous mortgage industry events including the Five Star Conference & Expo and the American Legal & Financial Network Conference and Regional Trainings. Boylan is admitted to practice law in the states of California and Washington. Boylan has received an AV Preeminent® rating from Martindale Hubbell, ranking at the highest level of professional excellence for legal knowledge, communication skills, and ethical standards. i Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Tr. for RMAC Remic Tr., Series 2008-1 v. Duda, No. A-1- CA-38476, 2021 WL 4146787, at *1 (N.M. Ct. App. Sept. 13, 2021). ii Singleton v. Greymar Assocs., 882 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 2004). iii U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Bartram, 140 So. 3d 1007 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014). iv Star Funding Sols., LLC v. Krondes, 101 So. 3d 403 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012). v NMSA 1978, Section 37-1-3 (2015). vi See LSF9 Master Participation Tr., 2019-NMCA-055, ¶ 12 (holding actions on payments on a mortgage loan due prior to acceleration were time barred by Section 37-1-3's statute of limitations); Lea Cnty. State Bank v. Markum Ranch P'ship, 2015- NMCA-026, ¶ 11, 344 P.3d 1089 (stating that pursuant to Section 37-1-3(A) "[t]he applicable statute of limitations on actions involving promissory notes is six years"). vii NMSA 1978, Section 37-1-16 (2015). viii Corona v. Corona, 2014-NMCA-071, ¶ 14, 329 P.3d 701, 708 ix Joslin v. Gregory, 2003–NMCA–133, ¶ 14, 134 N.M. 527, 80 P.3d 464 (quoting II Calvin W. Corman, Limitation of Actions § 9.12.3, at 93 (1991)). x Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Tr. for RMAC Remic Tr., Series 2008-1 v. Duda, No. A-1- CA-38476, 2021 WL 4146787, at *7 (N.M. Ct. App. Sept. 13, 2021).

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of DS News - DS News December 2021