PSA. In an effort to distinguish this authority, Ms. Jepson contends that, as a mortgagor, she still has standing to chal lenge a void assignment. She relies on the theory that: A debtor may, generally, assert against an assignee all equities or defenses existing against the assignor prior to notice of the assignment, any matters rendering the assignment absolutely invalid or ineffective, and the lack of the plaintiffs title or right to sue; but, if the assignment is effective to pass legal title, the debtor cannot interpose defects or objections which merely render the assignment voidable at the election of the assignor or those standing in his or her shoes. 6A C.J.S. Assignments § 133 (2016) (emphasis added); see also Woods v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 733 F.3d 349, 354 (1st Cir.2013) (<HOLDING>). Put another way, a voidable assignment is one
holding assignment of a mortgage was not subject to article 9 holding that beneficiary of general support trust has a legal right to compel distribution of funds internal quotation marks omitted holding that a foreign entity without property or presence in this country has no constitutional rights under the due process clause or otherwise internal quotation marks omitted holding internal revenue service has standing to challenge validity of mortgage of seized property holding that under massachusetts law a mortgagor has standing to challenge  a mortgage assignment as invalid ineffective or void internal quotation marks omitted