contention that RM Kids lacked standing is moot, and we need not address its contention that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict that the “environmental stigma” constituted a title defect covered by the insurance policy. However, we affirm the trial court’s admission of RM Kids’s expert’s testimony and its denial of Old Republic’s motion for directed verdict regarding consi , 914 FSupp. 1252, 1254 (E.D. N.C. 1996) (finding that “[s]ince a lender suffers loss only if the note is not repaid, the discovery of an insured-against lien does not trigger recognition of that loss,” rather “[o]nly the completion of foreclosure signifies that a lender will not collect on its note”); Karl v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co., 20 CalApp4th 972, 983-84 (IV) (Cal. App. 1993) (<HOLDING>); Blackhawk Prod. Credit Assoc. v. Chicago
holding that the defense of lack of venue must be made at the earliest opportunity to plead or it is waived holding that an insured mortgagees loss under a title insurance policy cannot be measured until the note has not been repaid and the security for the mortgage is shown to be inadequate holding that the earliest a loss can be claimed on a lenders title insurance policy is at the time of completion of foreclosure holding that an arbitration award involving the appellants challenge to the failure of the insurance company to ensure that he had read and understood a signed waiver and to attach the waiver to the insurance policy as contrary to public policy is not reviewable by the courts because there is no challenge to a provision or term of the policy the appellant never claimed that the waiver or policy language itself was contrary to the public policy of this commonwealth holding that in order for claim to be within scope of coverage of title insurance policy it must be specifically provided for