US Bank National Ass'n v. Guillaume
US Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Guillaume, 209 N.J. 449 (2012)
- Court
- Supreme Court of New Jersey
- Decided
- 2012-02-27
- Docket
- Not listed in the sources consulted
What happened
The Guillaumes' notice of intention to foreclose listed the loan servicer instead of the lender. They sought to undo a default judgment.
What the court decided
The New Jersey Supreme Court held the notice must name the actual lender, so the notice was defective — but the trial court may choose the remedy, such as ordering a corrected notice, instead of dismissal. Their other arguments, including TILA rescission, failed.
In the court's words
“requires that foreclosure plaintiffs list on the notice of intention the name and address of the actual lender”
Why it may matter to you
Notice defects are real — but courts often fix them with a new notice (and new time for you) rather than ending the case. Plan for that.
Why it might not apply
New Jersey's Fair Foreclosure Act; a corrected notice restarts the process rather than ending it.
Most useful when
- Your pre-foreclosure notice named only the servicer, not the lender
How to cite it
The full citation for the first time you mention it, a short form for later, and a sample sentence you can adapt.
US Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Guillaume, 209 N.J. 449 (2012)Short formGuillaume, 209 N.J. 449Draft — check it with free legal aid before you file or say it in court.
In US Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Guillaume, 209 N.J. 449 (2012), the court held that a pre-foreclosure notice of intention must name the actual lender, though the court may cure the defect with a corrected notice rather than dismissal. Here, [say in one sentence what happened in your case]
Ask Techy about this case
Techy explains the case in plain words, why it may matter to you, its limits, and how to prepare. It only uses this case record.
Related cases
- Homeowner wonBinding
Jesinoski v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
574 U.S. 259 · Decided 2015
The Jesinoskis refinanced their home and, within three years, sent the lender a letter rescinding the loan for missing Truth in Lending disclosures. The lower courts said they also had to file a lawsuit within three years.
Read the case - Homeowner wonBinding
Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich, L.P.A.
559 U.S. 573 · Decided 2010
A law firm filed a foreclosure against Ms. Jerman and sent a notice saying she had to dispute the debt in writing. She sued, and the firm said its mistake was an honest legal error.
Read the case - Homeowner wonBinding
Ogden v. Gibraltar Savings Ass'n
640 S.W.2d 232 · Decided 1982
Mr. Ogden owned a house in Corpus Christi. After he fell behind, the savings association posted a trustee's sale and sold the house. He sued for wrongful foreclosure and lost in the lower courts.
Read the case