Court Report

A property owner appealed a district court decision favoring his title insurance provider, which had previously denied him coverage in an easement dispute with his neighbors. In his appeal, the plaintiff claims his title company is liable for bad faith damages, among other arguments.

During the probate process of an estate sale, an unsatisfied existing mortgage on the property was discovered, and the selling party was found to have failed to disclose knowledge of the pre-existing mortgage. The ensuing dispute was heard in federal court.

The Supreme Court of Hawai’i recently considered an appeal brought forward by an individual who had previously disputed chain of title with the parent company of a golf course and country club, alleging that the lands in question were royal holdings.

A dispute between California Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara and Consumer Watchdog was settled on June 30, when a court order upheld Lara’s recent efforts to stabilize the state’s insurance market through two recent bulletins.

More than 90 years of legal precedent on presidential authority over independent federal agencies, set by the 1935 decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, was overturned on June 29 by a Supreme Court ruling.

A property in Aurora, Colo., was foreclosed by the local municipality which failed to notify the correct owner, leading to a court-ordered voided foreclosure and invalidated interests. The property’s new owner appealed the lower court decision.

In a landmark excess equity case concerning tax foreclosure sales, the Supreme Court determined that former owners of seized properties are owed foreclosure sale proceeds minus tax debts based on the home’s auction price, not fair market value.

One portion of a long-standing lawsuit over fraud and negligence in a real estate closing, which began in 2004, has been settled by the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, of New York.

After his suit against an insurance agency and title company was stopped by summary judgement in a trial court, one property buyer appealed while representing himself. The appeals court then had to determine whether the trial court was right to deny the man’s punitive damages claims.

After falling victim to a fraud scheme, a financial company sued the closing firm involved in the transaction for failing to act with due caution and causing financial harm. A district court eventually ruled on whether the matter would go to trial.