Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “Foreclosure”

Illinois App. Court (3rd Dist) Holds Third Refiled Foreclosure Not Barred

The Appellate Court of Illinois, Third District, recently rejected a mortgagor’s argument that the Illinois single refiling rule barred a third attempt at foreclosure where the intervening foreclosure complaint was premised upon an alleged default under a loan modification agreement. A copy of the opinion in Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Norris is available at:  Link to Opinion. The convoluted procedural and factual history for the mortgage loan at issue in this matter can be boiled down to the following: The defendant mortgagor (who was not a signatory to the promissory note) and his ex-spouse defaulted under the terms of…

5th Cir. Holds Mortgage Fraud Debts Not Dischargeable

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held that debts arising from a scheme to deprive mortgagees of surplus foreclosure sale proceeds were non-dischargeable, affirming the bankruptcy court’s judgment against the debtor in consolidated adversary proceedings filed by various lenders that held first mortgage liens. A copy of the opinion in Cowin v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. is available at:  Link to Opinion. The debtor orchestrated a mortgage fraud scheme by which a straw buyer acquired property subject to a first mortgage at a condominium association’s foreclosure sale. The buyer then entered into a “tax-transfer loan agreement”…

6th Cir. Rejects Municipality’s ‘Public Nuisance’ Claims Against Mortgage Lender

The U.S. Court of Appeal for the Sixth Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a municipality’s public nuisance claims against two different mortgage lenders for allegedly maintaining a policy of violating local and state building codes if the costs outweighed the value added to the eventual resale of foreclosed property. A copy of the opinion in City of Cincinnati v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company is available at:  Link to Opinion. The municipality brought multiple claims against the mortgage lender defendants alleging various claims concerning the maintenance and condition of REO properties.  Eventually, through multiple amended pleadings, stipulations and settlements, only one…

Fla. App. Court (1st DCA) Holds Third-Refiled Foreclosure Action Not Barred by Res Judicata or SOL

The District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida, First District, recently affirmed the trial court’s entry of a final judgment of foreclosure, holding that because the complaint included at least some installment payments within five years of the filing of the complaint, the action was not barred by res judicata or the statute of limitations. A copy of the opinion in Forero v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC  is available at: Link to Opinion. Husband and wife borrowers defaulted on their mortgage loan in December 2008. The mortgagee filed a foreclosure action in February 2010, but voluntarily dismissed the case in…

Illinois Fed. Court Holds No ‘Bad Faith Denial Of Coverage’ Against Title Insurers in Illinois

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois recently held that a title insurer may exclude coverage under the exception for defects “created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the insured claimant” without intentional or wrongful conduct by the insured. In so ruling, the Court also held that the Illinois statute for bad faith denial of coverage by insurers did not apply to title insurers. A copy of the opinion in Bank of America, NA v. Chicago Title Insurance Company is available at:  Link to Opinion. In 2007, a developer sought to purchase real estate in Yorkville, Illinois, to…

Fla. App. Court (2nd DCA) Holds Trial Court Erred in Applying Texas Law to Foreclosure Deficiency Claim

The District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida, Second District, recently held that where loan documents provided that Florida law applied to foreclosure claims, the trial court erred in applying Texas law because the deficiency claim in the case was part of the Florida foreclosure process. A copy of the opinion in Bonita Real Estate Partners, LLC v. SLF IV Lending, L.P. is available at:  Link to Opinion. Two limited liability companies and their principals borrowed $6.1 million to develop real estate, signing a promissory note, mortgage and personal guarantees. The loan documents provided that they would be…

4th Cir. Holds SCRA Does Not Apply to Mortgage Loan Incurred During Service, Even If Borrower Re-Enlists

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently held that the federal Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) does not apply to a mortgage loan obligation incurred while a borrower is a member of the military, even where he subsequently leaves and then later re-enlists in the military prior to a foreclosure sale. A copy of the opinion in Sibert v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA is available at:  Link to Opinion. The borrower obtained a mortgage loan to purchase his home from the lender while he was serving in the U.S. Navy.  After his discharge from the Navy, the borrower…

Fla. App. Court (4th DCA) Upholds Judgment for Borrower in Foreclosure Where Mortgagee Did Not File Allonge

The District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida, Fourth District, recently affirmed a final judgment in favor of a borrower because the foreclosing mortgagee failed to file the original allonge to the note, holding that as a result the mortgagee lacked standing to foreclose. A copy of the opinion in U.S. Bank National Assoc., etc. v. Jean Kachik is available at:  Link to Opinion. A mortgagee sued to foreclose the mortgage, attaching copies of the promissory note and an “Endorsement and Assignment of Note” to the complaint. The endorsement was “blank.” At trial, the mortgagee offered the original note…

Illinois App. Court (1st Dist) Holds Borrower Could Not Challenge Foreclosure Sale Notice as Unlawfully Discriminatory

The Illinois Court of Appeals, First District, recently determined that a borrower in a foreclosure matter did not have standing to challenge whether the mortgagee’s notice of sale was in violation of the Illinois Human Rights Act (IHRA). Following the entry of a judgment of foreclosure, the plaintiff mortgagee published its notice of sale, in which the mortgagee required that anyone attending the sale possess a “photo identification issued by a government agency.” The mortgagee purchased the property at the sale, and then moved for an order confirming the sale.  The borrower objected to the mortgagee’s motion, arguing that the…

Fla. App. Court (5th DCA) Holds Default Date Outside SOL in Complaint Avoided by Evidence That Defaults Continued

The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District, recently held that a foreclosure complaint was not time-barred despite the initial default occurring outside Florida’s five-year statute of limitations, because the mortgagee both alleged and proved that the borrowers defaulted on every payment due from the date of the initial default. In so ruling, the 5th DCA applied the standards set forth by the Florida Supreme Court in Bartram v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, to conclude that the foreclosure action was not barred by the five-year statute of limitations under Fla. Stat. § 95.11(2)(c), because the mortgage was in a…

6th Cir. BAP Holds BK Court Lacked Jurisdiction to Void Mortgage Lien Signed Before but Recorded During Bankruptcy

The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that the bankruptcy court lacked subject matter jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine to void the foreclosure of a mortgage lien that was executed by the debtors before bankruptcy, but recorded while the automatic stay was in effect. In so ruling, the BAP held that the mortgage was effective upon signing, the pre-petition lien survived the bankruptcy, the creditor’s exercise of its in rem rights did not implicate the discharge order, and the bankruptcy court incorrectly applied the exception to the Rooker-Feldman doctrine recognized in…

8th Cir. Affirms Ruling in Favor of Servicers Due to Plaintiffs’ Misrepresentations in Loan Mod Application

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed summary judgment against a former husband borrower and his ex-wife on their claims under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA) and for tortious interference with contract. In so ruling, the Court held that the foreclosure of the plaintiffs’ home loan was justified due to the husband’s misrepresentation on the modification application that he, not his ex-wife who was responsible for making the payments, was experiencing financial hardship and could not afford the loan payments. A copy of the opinion in Dale Wheatley v. JP Morgan Chase Bank is available…