ARTICLE
9 February 2015

S.D.N.Y. Rejects "Pervasive Breach" Claim And Issues Numerous RMBS Rulings In Deciding Trusts’ And Issuer’s Motions For Summary Judgment

O
Orrick

Contributor

Orrick logo
Orrick is a global law firm focused on serving the technology & innovation, energy & infrastructure and finance sectors. Founded over 150 years ago, Orrick has offices in 25+ markets worldwide. Financial Times selected Orrick as the Most Innovative Law Firm in North America for three years in a row.
On January 9, 2015, in a series of rulings, Judge P. Kevin Castel of the United States Court for the Southern District of New York granted in part and denied in part motions for partial summary judgment.
United States Finance and Banking
Orrick are most popular:
  • within Litigation and Mediation & Arbitration topic(s)

On January 9, 2015, in a series of rulings, Judge P. Kevin Castel of the United States Court for the Southern District of New York granted in part and denied in part motions for partial summary judgment brought by three MASTR Adjustable Rate Mortgages Trusts (2006-OA2, 2007-1, and 2007-3) (the Trusts) and UBS Real Estate Securities Inc. (UBS).  The Trusts filed this repurchase claim against UBS after purchasing 17,082 loans, which the Trusts claimed contained breaches of the Pooling and Servicing Agreements' representations and warranties.  First, Judge Castel held that, as a general matter, the Trust could only proceed on loans which were the subject of timely repurchase demands – i.e., the demand's 90-day cure period must have expired within the six-year statute of limitations period. Second, Judge Castel found that the Trusts could also recover on loans for which it proved UBS' independent discovery of breaches of representations and warranties, even if those loans were not included in any breach notices. The Trust would be required to prove discovery as to individual loans at trial,   In addition, Judge Castel ruled that the Trusts could not recover under a theory of "pervasive breach."  Judge Castel further held that the Trusts could recover losses incurred on liquidated or foreclosed properties, that evidence of default was not required in order to show a breach of representations and warranties, that summary judgment was inappropriate for determining whether loan files were incomplete at the time of origination, and that the Trusts could not recover rescissory damages.  Order.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More