Foreclosure Strategies
May 10 2018
The best way to deal with a foreclosure is to take aggressive legal action when the foreclosure laws... [Read More...]
February 25, 2020 By
The homeowner had executed a note and mortgage. The note and mortgage was assigned to the bank who is the plaintiff in the lawsuit. The bank’s foreclosure lawsuit claimed that the homeowner had failed to make payments from November 1, 2008 to the present time. The foreclosure lawsuit was initiated on March 9, 2019. The homeowner failed to answer or appear in the foreclosure case. The bank did not take action until they were ordered to do so with regard to the motion appointing the referee to sell the house. At that point the bank sought a default judgment against the homeowners. The bank presented arguments there was sufficient basis for the delay in moving for a default judgment. They claimed the delay was caused by the substitution of the attorneys for the bank. However, Justice Bluth took note the new lawyers were substituted in 2015. She found the bank had failed to move forward for a default judgment until it was ordered by her to do so. She found the bank failed to establish a reasonable excuse for their delay in moving forward with the default judgment.
Justice Bluth found the change in the attorneys for the bank took place 2 years after the bank should have moved for a default judgment. They were required to move for a default judgment within a year. She also found the change of attorneys does not excuse a 9 year delay in moving for a default judgment. Justice Bluth found that not one of the three different groups of attorneys representing the bank moved for a default judgment in a decade. Justice Bluth granted the homeowners cross motion to dismiss the case as being abandoned.