Follow Us

Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

MERS and the Recording Act

In Merscorp. v. Romaine (see page 7, infra), Suffolk County Supreme Court was faced with a clash between the traditionally local real property recording system and the increasingly national secondary mortgage market. The County Clerk's office had refused to accept for recording instruments filed in the name of MERS (Mortgage Electronic Recording Systems, Inc.), prompting a proceeding by MERS and the operating company that owns the MERS system for a writ of mandamus compelling the County Clerk to record and index MERS instruments. The case resulted in a split decision: the County Clerk is required to record MERS mortgages, but not assignments or certificates of discharge. The court's opinion, however, reveals some misunderstanding both of the MERS system and of the recording act.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
This premium content is locked for New York Real Estate Law Reporter subscribers only

Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN REAL ESTATE PRACTICE IN NEW YORK.
  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical analysis of significant real estate cases in New York
  • Tap into expert guidance from top real estate lawyers and experts

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Subscribe Now For Unlimited Access

Read These Next