U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Pinkney – A Party Seeking Foreclosure Must Establish Holder Status

In the present case, plaintiff alleged in its 10 September 2014 complaint that it was the present holder of the Note and Subject Deed of Trust. Yet, at the hearing on the Pinkneys’ motion to dismiss, plaintiff’s counsel argued that plaintiff was “a holder as we say we are or we’re a non-holder in possession of the instrument.” Plaintiff’s complaint did not allege the alternative theory that plaintiff was a nonholder in possession of the Note and plaintiff did not amend its complaint at any time to allege this additional theory. We conclude that based on the absence of specific allegations regarding a non-holder theory, we need not address plaintiff’s arguments concerning the non-holder in possession argument.

Based on the foregoing reasons, we hold that the trial court did not err in dismissing plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 12(b)(6). Having so held, we need not address plaintiff’s remaining argument.

Full opinion below…



U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Pinkney

[scribd id=315709061 key=key-sKZ2j902VXqTC445z5Zt mode=scroll]