In the latest chapter of our decade-plus representation of the LaRace family regarding the defense of their home from a wrongful foreclosure, on the morning of July 13, 2020, we filed our Motion to file the LaRace Petition for Direct Appellate Review ("DAR") Late (with proposed DAR) with the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. The SJC has not ruled on whether we can file the DAR late, or whether they will take this up for review, we merely received notice that our documents were "accepted" for filing.
Issues raised in this appeal (as well as the LaRace filed Brief at the Massachusetts Appeals Court under Ca, No. 2019-P-1507), include (but are not limited to) the following:
1) An examination of the try-title statute, where at the time the LaRace family filed their 2012 petition, there was never any completed foreclosure auction sale, and thus could be no res judicata associated with that action;
2) An examination of G.L. c. 244, Section 35C(b), and whether under the authority of G.L. c. 244, Section 35(g) the Division of Banks promulgated 209 C.M.R. 18.21A(2)(c), whether the wording of this regulation requires that the borrower be provided with a chain of title and ownership of the note and mortgage (in addition to the copy of the note) at the time the borrower receives the section 14 foreclosure notice
209 C.M.R. 18.21A(2)(c) A third party loan servicer shall certify in writing the basis for asserting that the foreclosing party has the right to foreclose, including but not limited to, certification of the chain of title and ownership of the note and mortgage from the date of the recording of the mortgage being foreclosed upon. The third-party loan servicer shall provide such certification to the borrower with the notice of foreclosure provided pursuant to M.G.L. ch. 244, § 14, and shall also include a copy of the note with all required endorsements.
3) G.L. c. 260, Section 33, and whether the Defendants' acceleration of the maturity date of the LaRace note advanced the original maturity date of the note as stated upon the first page of the mortgage, rendering the LaRace Mortgage Obsolete.
4) Whether the SJC findings in U.S. Bank Nat'l Association v. Ibanez, 458 Mass. 637 (2011) represents the "law of the case", granting the LaRace family superior title in their name under G.L. c. 240, Sections 6-11, (Quiet Title) where Wells Fargo made the same argument it previously made in 2008 for its foundation that it was in current possession of the right to enforce the LaRace note and mortgage at the time of the first publication under G.L. c. 244, Section 14
We will update as events warrant