mortgage. MERS has disavowed any interest in the debt, including the right to receive payment or otherwise service the loan. Even to the extent MERS is an agent of the note holder, its rights and duties concern only legal title to the mortgage, not the note or beneficial interest in the mortgage. See Saunders, 2 A.3d at 295. Without a claim to the underlying debt, MERS therefore cannot exercise the power of sale, regardless of the language in the mortgage contract giving it this power. See Saurman, 292 Mich.App. at 328-29, 807 N.W.2d 412. That the mortgagor consented to this contractual language does not operate as a waiver of the law’s protection against foreclosure by the wrong entity. Cf. Henry v. Mansfield Beauty Acad., Inc., 353 Mass. 507, 511, 233 N.E.2d 22 (1968) (Wilkins, C.J.) (<HOLDING>). Yet, it cannot be that no party may exercise
holding that employees may not contract away their flsa rights holding that afteracquired evidence may completely bar a claim for breach of the employment contract because the employers duty arises from the contract itself and falls with that contract holding that a party may not contract away the protection that a statute is intended to afford him nor may the other party to the contract exempt itself from its duty to comply with such statute holding that person who is not party to contract does not have standing to challenge contract holding that prevailing party to contract dispute may recover attorneys fees either pursuant to contract or pursuant to statute