Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Foreclosure

The following summaries are of recent published decisions of the California appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. The summaries are presented without regard to whether Severson & Werson represented a party in the case.

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

Before a nonjudicial foreclosure sale, the borrower/owner filed a worngful foreclosure suit against the deed of trust beneficiary and recorded a lis pendens.  This case holds that the purchaser at the nonjudicial foreclosure sale who thereafter brought an unlawful detainer action against the borrower/owner was wrongly awarded judgment because it did not prove it duly perfected title given the lis… Read More

Particularly as amended in 2019, Civ. Code 2923.7 requires a loan servicer to appoint a SPOC for each borrower who seeks a foreclosure alternative.  The borrower need not specifically request a SPOC in order to trigger the statute.  Interpreting Civ. Code 2924.12, the decision holds that for post-foreclosure damages purposes, the court must analyze harm in three steps.  First, did… Read More

The Supreme Court holds that lenders and loan servicers do not owe borrowers a duty of care in handling their loan modification applications.  Lender and borrower are in privity of contract, and the economic loss rule prevents recovery for purely economic loss based on negligence between contracting parties.  The Biakanja factors apply only to parties not in privity of contract. … Read More

Borrower's fourth mortgage foreclosure delay suit was properly dismissed as barred by the res judicata effect of the prior three judgments against her, two of which had been affirmed on appeal.  All the actions involved the same cause of action as they all asserted a violation of borrower's ownership interest in the property that was subject to her deed of… Read More

Defendant initially violated HBOR by refusing to consider plaintiff's loan modification application because only his deceased wife was the borrower on the loan, but defendant cured its violation after suit was filed by canceling the pending foreclosure, accepting and review plaintiff's loan modification application, and offering him a trial payment plan intended to lead to a loan modification.  Thinking he… Read More

Robin held a senior deed of trust. Crowell held a junior lien on the same property.  Robin commenced a judicial foreclosure action against the debtor and the property but failed to name and serve Crowell as a defendnat in the suit.  Some years after the judicial foreclosure sale, Robin brought this quiet title action against Crowell to "complete" the judicial… Read More

Under Civ. Code 2924.15, HBOR's provisions apply only to owner-occupied properties.  But the section goes on to define "owner-occupied" as property that is the borrower's principal residence and security for a loan made for consumer purposes.  This decision reads the definition literally, holding that so long as the property is the borrower's principal residence, HBOR's provisions apply even if the… Read More

A homeowner should have been allowed to amend his complaint to allege that the party foreclosing on his house lacked any interest in his loan since that the prior owner of the loan had already assigned it to someone else before executing the assignment to the foreclosing party. Read More

This California case is at the intersection of interpleader and foreclosure litigation. A foreclosure trustee interpleaded surplus funds following a foreclosure sale that was challenged by the borrower in a wrongful foreclosure action.  It shouldn’t have.  An interpleader lies only where the holder of third-party funds may face multiple liabilities, but Civil Code section 2924k sets forth exactly how surplus… Read More

A good faith purchaser of the contents of a self-storage unit takes the contents free and clear of the unit lessee’s claims, even if the lessor had violated the Storage Facility Act by failing to enter into a written lease with the lessee. Read More

Interpleader cross-complaint filed by the trustee of a deed of trust was correctly dismissed because there was no question that surplus proceeds from a foreclosure sale belonged to the trustor, notwithstanding the trustor’s ongoing wrongful foreclosure lawsuit. Read More

Sanctions were improperly awarded under CCP 128.7 since plaintiffs’ suit was not frivolous; they had a nonfrivolous argument that their agreement to settle a prior action did not release the defendants in this follow-on suit. Read More

The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”) preempts a Nevada law that limited deficiency judgments on foreclosure to the amount by which the price the owner paid to acquire the loan exceeded the foreclosure sale price.   Read More

A void default judgment, obtained without proper service on the defendant, cannot be the foundation of a valid claim of title to property, so the secured lender against whom the default judgment was entered prevails over a bona fide purchaser from the plaintiff.   Read More

1 2