• RESPA: policy statement issued by HUD did not supplement RESPA’s existing “affiliated business arrangement” safe-harbor prerequisites; title insurance company with ABA that qualified under RESPA was not also subject to additional prerequisite contained in policy statement – Carter v. Welles-Bowen Realty, Inc., No. 10-3922 (6th Cir. Nov. 27, 2013) (affirming district court ruling)
  • Attorney Agent: lawyer acting as title agent who was willfully blind to what he should have known was false information in preparing HUD settlement statements for straw transactions indefinitely suspended – Mahoning County Bar Association v. Wagner, No. 2013-Ohio-5087 (Ohio Nov. 21, 2013) (suspension)
  • Policy Interpretation: section 7(a)(ii) of title insurance policy too indefinite to be enforced – Doss & Assocs. v. First Am. Title Ins. Co., Nos. A13A0988, A13A0689, A13A0990 (Ga. App. Nov. 21, 2013) (affirming in part, reversing in part, summary judgment)
  • Policy Interpretation: section 7(a)(iii) of title insurance policy precludes liability even if mortgage priority not as insured as long as insured receives payment in excess of value of insured estate – Doss & Assocs. v. First Am. Title Ins. Co., Nos. A13A0988, A13A0689, A13A0990 (Ga. App. Nov. 21, 2013) (affirming in part, reversing in part, summary judgment)
  • Continuation of Coverage: under section 2(c) of title insurance policy, insured has claim for failure of mortgage lien on one parcel of collateral, even though it forecloses on another parcel of collateral and receives more than original principal amount of loan – Preservation Capital Consultants, LLC v. First Am. Title Ins. Co., No. 2012-209186 (affirming summary judgment)