Nancy Mills
ORDER
The plaintiff seeks a summary judgment on its complaint for foreclosure. The defendant opposes the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and requests summary judgment in her favor.
The plaintiff has failed to establish the foundation necessary for consideration of Affiant Donna J. Gilkerson's testimony and the business records referred to in her affidavit. (Gilkerson Aff. ¶¶ 1-2, 4-7.) See Beneficial Maine, Inc. v. Carter, 2011 ME 77, ¶¶ 15-16, 25 A.3d 96; HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc. v. Murphy, 2011 ME 59, ¶ 10, 19 A.3d 815; M.R. Evid. 803(6); M.R. Civ. P. 56(e).
The plaintiff has not provided adequate information to show that Affiant Gilkerson is qualified to testify about the records created by Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation and Chase Home Finance LLC.
The plaintiff also failed to cite correctly to portions of the record that support key statements of material fact. (Pl.'s S.M.F. ¶¶ 1, 3-4, 6-9, 18; Gilkerson Aff. ¶¶ 3-7.) See M.R. Civ. P. 56(h)(4). The plaintiff has not addressed the modification of the loan in the statement of material facts. (See Gilkerson Aff. ¶ 8.) Finally, although the plaintiff filed a notice or merger, the relationship among the entities is not addressed in the statement of facts. (Pl.'s S.M.F. ¶ 15.)
No motion for substitution of parties was filed. M.R. Civ. P. 25.
--------
The court declines to grant summary judgment in the defendant's favor, as questions of material fact remain regarding ownership of the note and mortgage. (Def.'s A.S.M.F. ¶¶ D1-D2; Schofield Aff. ¶¶ 3-6.)
The entry is
The Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
The Defendant's Request for Summary Judgment is DENIED.
__________
Nancy Mills
Justice, Superior Court