In October 2006, America's Wholesale Lender (AWL) agreed to loan John Horvath $650,000. The
loan was stated in an interest-only, fixed-rate note
and was secured by a deed of trust on Horvath's
home. In exchange for the $650,000, Horvath
agreed to repay AWL in monthly installments rang-
ing from about $3,000 to $5,000. The note allowed
AWL (and any subsequent holder) to freely transfer
the note. In fact, the note provided for "anyone who
takes this Note by transfer” to inherit the powers
of the “Note Holder," including the right to accel-
erate payment in the event that Horvath defaulted.
Any party who took the note would have the right
to enforce it. In 2009, the note was transferred to
Bank of New York, and a little over a half year later,
Horvath defaulted. His property was foreclosed on,
and then he proceeded to sue. Was Horvath right
in suing? Why or why not, based on the wording of
the note? [Horvath v. Bank of NY, 641 F.3d 617, 2011
U. S. App. LEXIS 10152.]