Supreme Court Seeks Federal Government Opinion on National Bank Act Preemption of State Foreclosure Law


Considering a petition for certiorari filed by Federal National Mortgage Association in a case concerning which state’s law governs a national bank’s authority to serve as trustee under a deed of trust—the state in which the bank is located, or the state in which the secured property is located—the Supreme Court invited the Solicitor General to weigh in. Following a non-judicial foreclosure, Fannie Mae filed an unlawful detainer action seeking to remove a borrower from her home. During a hearing on the unlawful detainer action, the borrower argued that under Utah law, a subsidiary of the national bank who conducted the foreclosure, could not serve as a trustee under Utah law. In particular, the borrower argued that under Utah law, only members of the Utah State Bar or title insurance companies with an office in Utah had the authority to serve as a trustee. Fannie Mae countered that federal law preempted Utah law, and thus allowed the subsidiary to conduct the foreclosure sale. The lower court agreed, and the borrower appealed. Ultimately, the issue made its way to the Utah Supreme Court, which rejected Fannie Mae’s argument, ruling that a Utah statute restricting trustees to in-state attorneys and licensed title insurance companies barred the national bank from serving as trustee. The Utah Supreme Court also rejected Fannie Mae’s argument that the National Bank Act allows a national bank to act as a fiduciary when not inconsistent with state law, and should be construed to allow banks to serve as trustee whenever allowed by the law of the state in which the bank is located. Rather, the Utah Supreme Court held that the National Bank Act allowed a national bank to act as fiduciary whenever allowed by the law of state in which the secured property is located.

There is a circuit split over the question, including the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (in which Utah is located), which reached a contrary holding to the Utah Supreme Court in a case with similar facts. In fact, in Garrett v. ReconTrust, N.A. 546 Fed.Appx. 736 (10th Cir. 2013), the Tenth Circuit concluded that the National Bank Act provided “no direction” on the question at hand and gave deference to the federal regulator. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has also issued a related decision (see Jaldin v. ReconTrust, 539 Fed.Appx. 97 (4th Cir. 2013)). The Supreme Court of the United States has not yet determined whether to accept certiorari, and assuming the Solicitor General accepts the Supreme Court’s invitation to weigh in, it remains to be seen which party’s position the Solicitor General will support.

IRS Circular 230 Disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. tax advice contained in this informational piece (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and may not be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.


Written by:

Published In:

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Goodwin Procter LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.