In a variety of other threads, we have from time to time touched upon a rather singular legal principle which is centuries old and of almost universal application. This is the principle that the "assignment of a mortgage or deed of trust without the corresponding negotiation of the note, bond and/or indebtedness is a nullity".
I recently started a new thread to collect authority and discussion upon this general topic as it relates to New York State:
"New York Has Long Held That Assignment of the Mortgage Without Assignment of the Note is a NULLITY"
But upon reflection, I think that this topic deserves a thread nationally.
Perhaps others might take an interest in starting threads in respect of this topic for other particular jurisdictions, which might be linked from this thread.
The overall purpose is to improve discoverability and to have useful critical conversations about this topic, particularly as it pertains to MERS.
The single central national decision that best exemplifies and supports the topic is the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Carpenter v. Longan:
“The note and mortgage are inseparable; the former as essential, the latter as an incident. An assignment of the note carries the mortgage with it, while an assignment of the latter alone is a nullity. [FN 3 cites Jackson v. Blodget, 5 Cowan, 205; Jackson v. Willard, 4 Johnson, 43.] ” Carpenter v. Longan, 83 U.S. 271; 21 L. Ed. 313; 1872 U.S. LEXIS 1157; 16 Wall. 271 (U.S. 1873). See: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5449554966990758102
Others have occasionally mentioned this case in respect of this and other related holdings therein, but I believe that I may have given the decision short shrift in prior threads.
I therefore submit this topic for discussion and elaboration.