Our Story
How a Fight Over a Mortgage Document Became a Fight for North Dakota Homeowners
This is the documented history of the Young family of Fargo, North Dakota — from the purchase of their home in 2016 to the sheriff's foreclosure sale in 2026 and the campaign that followed. It is told in chapters so that the record can be examined step by step. Nothing disputed is described here as conclusively established without the supporting evidence, which is linked throughout.
- Chapter 01
Buying Our Family Home
On April 20, 2016, James C. Young and Tahnee R. Young purchased their family home in Fargo, North Dakota. Like many families, they understood a home to be more than a transaction — it was stability, a place to build a life, and the foundation of their future. This chapter is where the story begins: with a family and a home. - Chapter 02
The Mortgage Documents and Questions We Discovered
Years after the purchase, the Young family states they began to ask questions about the mortgage documents affecting their home — including an assignment of the mortgage recorded on July 21, 2023, from MERS to MidFirst Bank. The family contends that characteristics of that assignment raised concerns about its authenticity. This chapter describes what they found and why it mattered to them. - Chapter 03
Three Handwriting Experts and Their Findings
The Young family retained three handwriting experts to examine the disputed mortgage assignment. According to the family, each expert applied documented methodology and identified characteristics consistent with a signature or document that may not be authentic. Their reports are presented in full on the Three Experts page. This is an expert opinion, not a judicial finding — a distinction this campaign is careful to maintain. - Chapter 04
Our Attempts to Challenge the Documents
The Young family states they sought to bring their questions about the assignment before a court. They describe encountering procedural barriers — including a denied injunction and a denied motion for reconsideration — that, in their account, prevented the disputed document from being fully examined on the merits. This chapter describes those efforts and the rulings that followed. - Chapter 05
What the Courts Ruled
On April 23, 2024, the district court denied an injunction. On May 30, 2024, reconsideration was denied. On July 26, 2024, summary judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff, MidFirst Bank. These rulings are described here as rulings — the court's actions as recorded. The family's objections to each are identified as the family's position. - Chapter 06
The Foreclosure Judgment
The entry of summary judgment advanced the foreclosure toward judgment and sale. The Young family contends that genuine questions about the assignment's authenticity remained unresolved at that stage. This chapter explains what the judgment meant for the family and for the timeline that followed. - Chapter 07
Bankruptcy Proceedings and Continuing Litigation
On January 27, 2025, the Young family filed a Chapter 13 bankruptcy petition, which imposed an automatic stay on the foreclosure. On April 8, 2026, the bankruptcy court granted relief from the stay, allowing the foreclosure to resume. This chapter describes the interaction between the bankruptcy case and the state foreclosure proceedings. - Chapter 08
The Sheriff's Sale
On September 16, 2026, the Young family home was sold at a sheriff's foreclosure sale for approximately $340,000. North Dakota law provides a redemption period during which a homeowner may reclaim the property by paying the redemption amount. This is the event that gave rise to the emergency fundraising campaign. - Chapter 09
Questions Concerning Notice and Court Procedures
The Young family raises questions about notice and certain court procedures in their case, including a vexatious-litigant prefiling order entered on July 17, 2026. The family contends these procedural elements limited their access to meaningful review. This chapter presents those questions as the family's account, without characterizing any court's conduct as improper absent a verified basis. - Chapter 10
Our Attempts to Obtain Judicial Review
On January 7, 2026, the North Dakota Supreme Court issued an opinion. On October 8, 2026, the court denied permission to file a proposed supervisory-writ proceeding (the exact language of that order is subject to verification). The family states these rulings closed avenues of review without reaching the merits of their challenge to the assignment. - Chapter 11
The Fight to Redeem Our Home
Following the sheriff's sale, the Young family is working to raise the funds necessary to redeem their home within the legally applicable redemption period. The exact redemption amount and deadline are subject to verification. This chapter describes the redemption effort and the emergency fundraising campaign supporting it. - Chapter 12
Why We Want to Change North Dakota Law
The Young family believes that a North Dakota homeowner who presents credible evidence that a mortgage assignment may be forged, fraudulent, or legally void should have a meaningful opportunity to challenge it before losing their home. They encountered a legal framework they believe did not allow that. This chapter explains the reform they are proposing — a policy principle, not enacted law. - Chapter 13
What Happens Next
This fight is intended to outlast one family's case. The campaign is building a statewide network of homeowners, voters, and volunteers; educating the public about mortgage-assignment standing; and preparing for possible future legislative or ballot initiative activity. This chapter describes the road ahead — and how supporters can help.
The narrative above reflects the Young family's account, supported by the public record where cited. Court rulings are described as rulings; the family's objections are identified as the family's position; and expert findings are attributed to the experts who made them. Where a fact could not be independently verified, it is marked as such.