Appellant is correct that, in Michigan, the foreclosure of a senior mortgage extinguishes the lien of a junior mortgagee where the junior mortgagee does not exercise its right to redeem. Advanta Nat'l Bank v McClarty, 257 Mich App 113, 125; 667 NW2d 880 (2003). When property is not redeemed, "all right, title, and interest in the property vest[s]" in the purchaser.

A mortgage encumbers property without invalidating conveyances of title. See e.g., Advanta Nat'l Bank v McClarty, 257 Mich App 113, 124; 667 NW2d 880 (2003) ("[A] purchaser at a foreclosure sale of a second mortgage takes the property subject to the first mortgage, but the contrary is not true."). A party attempting to establish a right to judicial foreclosure must show that there was a debt that was secured by the mortgage.

Moreover, when a property is subject to multiple mortgages, failure to redeem following foreclosure of a senior mortgage also extinguishes the lien of a junior mortgagee. Advanta Nat'l Bank v McClarty, 257 Mich.App. 113, 125; 667 N.W.2d 880 (2003).

Advanta Nat'l Bank v McClarty, 257 Mich.App. 113, 125; 667 N.W.2d 880 (2003). The right to enforce a mortgage is extinguished after a foreclosure and at the end of the redemption period.

"It is well established that a purchaser at a foreclosure sale of a second mortgage takes the property subject to the first mortgage ...." Advanta Nat'l Bank v. McClarty , 257 Mich. App. 113, 124, 667 N.W.2d 880 (2003), citing Bd. of Trustees of the Gen. Ret. Sys. of Detroit v. Ren-Cen Indoor Tennis & Racquet Club , 145 Mich. App. 318, 322, 377 N.W.2d 432 (1985). "The principle of judicial comity generally states that foreign courts can afford each other's judgments mutual respect and recognition."

Appellant is correct that, in Michigan, the foreclosure of a senior mortgage extinguishes the lien of a junior mortgagee where the junior mortgagee does not exercise its right to redeem. Advanta Nat'l Bank v. McClarty , 257 Mich.App. 113, 125, 667 N.W.2d 880 (2003). When property is not redeemed, "all right, title, and interest in the property vest[s]" in the purchaser.

"[I]t is a cardinal rule of statutory construction that a clear and unambiguous statute warrants no further interpretation and requires full compliance with its provision." Advanta National Bank v McClarty, 257 Mich App 113, 120; 667 NW2d 880 (2003). An exception to this general rule exists when the legislature expressly includes a substantial compliance provision in the body of a statute.

However, "[a] purchaser at a foreclosure sale of a second mortgage takes the property subject to the first mortgage." Advanta Nat'l Bank v McClarty, 257 Mich.App. 113, 124; 667 N.W.2d 880 (2003). Typically, the foreclosure of a junior mortgage does not affect the rights of a senior mortgagee.

Changes to a court rule "must be construed in light of preceding" court rules "and the historical legal development of" the court rules. See Advanta National Bank v McClarty, 257 Mich.App. 113, 120; 667 N.W.2d 880 (2003). "Words should be given their common, generally accepted meaning, if consistent with the legislative aim in enacting the statute."

Consequently, when examining a statute that has been amended, cases interpreting earlier versions of the statute may have only limited precedential value depending on the scope of an amendment. See Advanta Nat'l Bank v. McClarty , 257 Mich.App. 113, 119-120, 667 N.W.2d 880 (2003). The language of the new statute controls over caselaw interpreting an earlier version of a statute, but the changes in an act "must be construed in light of preceding statutes and the historical legal development[s]."