As readers of this blog well know, the legal authority of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) and its business model are under constant attack by borrowers hoping to delay foreclosure and eviction proceedings. In an article published in the July 2013 issue of Mortgage Banking entitled “MERS Weathers The Storm”, Dykema attorneys Thomas M. Schehr and Andrew J. Kolozsvary analyze some of these cases and identify “a continuing trend toward affirming MERS’ business model” as compliant with mortgage and agency law. In the article, Schehr and Kolozsvary examine several cases--at both the state and federal level—and conclude that, despite the likelihood of future challenges to MERS’ authority, these court decisions reinforce the legal standing of the firm’s operational practices. Schehr and Kolozsvary draw from personal experience in several of the referenced cases. The two achieved a favorable outcome in Residential Funding Co., LLC v. Saurman (in which the Michigan Supreme Court reversed a Court of Appeals decision holding that tens of thousands of MERS-conducted foreclosures by advertisement were void ab initio). Schehr and Kolozsvary also collaborated on a win in Conlin v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (in which the Sixth Circuit affirmed dismissal of claims of robo-signing and fraud and upheld a contested foreclosure).