Paul H. Cherry V. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Group

analytical Essay
811 words
811 words

Joshua Franco Professor Nanci Carr BLAW 481 Paul H. Cherry v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Group Issue: Can Chase Manhattan recover from Cherry for breaching the acceleration clause? Rules: • An acceleration clause: Is a provision in a mortgage that provides the lender to collect the entire amount that a debtor owes in debt if the debtor becomes late even if one payment is missed. • Breach refers to the failing of the duty of upholding a contract. • A loan reactivation letter is a document that is sent from the mortgage lendor that remedies the mortgage loan by reactivating it. • Biggs v. Smith, was a case that reached the conclusion that a recorded mortgage provides clear evidence of the debtors attempt at the eradication of the mortgage. …show more content…

• United Service Corp. v. Vi-An Const. Corp., was a court case that said that a Satisfaction of a Mortgage “made through a mistake may be canceled” and a mortgage becomes reestablished as long as no other innocent third parties have “acquired an interest in the property.” • “Inequitable result test” Rule# 5 5) where there was intent to make a timely payment, and it was attempted and or steps taken to accomplish a payment was made. Nonetheless the payment was not made due to a misunderstanding or excusable neglect, coupled with some conduct of the mortgagee which contributed to the failure to pay when the payment was due or within the grace period for when the payment was …show more content…

Cherry argues that these attempts would satisfy the Inequitable result test Factors 1-5 but, the one that applies would be #5. Factor #5 applies because there was an intent to make a timely payment and it was attempted or tried to have the payment accomplished without neglect. The payments were intended to all be in good faith towards the lender. Thus, factor number five creates enough of the limited circumstances for the court to decide on Cherry’s favor in order to deny the foreclosure. Since Cherry intent was to pay Chase and also attempted to make the mortgage payments to Chase on time this factor would qualify Cherry to be granted the denial of the foreclosure. In addition, Cherry claims that he attempted to make the payments, but was told by a representative of Chase that there was no mortgage loan number upon which to apply the payments. As a result, the mortgage payments were placed into an account and later into his counsel’s trust account as a mortgage escrow account. In the end Cherry did take steps to make mortgage payments and Chase’s erroneous letter of satisfaction of payment helps Cherry on the fifth factor of the inequitable test

In this essay, the author

  • Explains that an acceleration clause provides the lender to collect the entire amount that a debtor owes in debt.
  • Explains that a loan reactivation letter and satisfaction of mortgage are documents from the mortgage lendor that are given to the lendee.
  • Explains that united service corp. v. vi-an const. corp was a court case that said that satisfaction may be canceled if no innocent third parties have acquired an interest in the property. the payment was not made due to misunderstanding or excusable neglect.
Continue ReadingCheck Writing Quality

Harness the Power of AI to Boost Your Grades!

  • Haven't found what you were looking for? Talk to me, I can help!
Continue Reading