The Legal Description Subscribers

The second quarter has come and gone, bringing with it some of the most watched title insurance-related decisions thus far this year.

Perhaps the most watched case was the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Freeman v. Quicken Loans, in which it determined in a 15 page ruling that "In order to establish a violation of Section 2607(b), a plaintiff must demonstrate that a charge for settlement services was divided between two or more persons." This decision ended a split among the U.S. appellate courts that had endured for years.

A jury in California found in favor of an underwriter who was sued for allegedly breaching the lenders closing instructions and the title policy after a borrower defaulted on a $37 million construction loan. The title insurer was able to prove that it was the lender's own failed underwriting decision that led to the loss. This is likely not the last of these types of cases that will be floating to the surface as lenders attempt to recoup funds lost during the crash.

These and other important court decisions are found in the pages of the second quarter installment of The Legal Description's Quarterly Case Law Report 2012:

• Can title company go after lender for providing wrong information?
  Alicia Oakes v. Countrywide Home Loans

• Title company gets dragged into deed dispute
  First American Title Insurance Co. v. MacLaren LLC

• Escrow role examined in improper closing cost case
  Karen Tavenner v. The Talon Group

Available FREE when you subscribe to The Legal Description.