Non-Judicial Foreclosure

31 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Johnson v. United States Dep't OF Agric.
  734 F.2d 774· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-18 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the preliminary injunction because the plaintiffs showed a substantial likelihood of success on the merits regarding due process claims related to non-judicial foreclosure.
• Pedro and Olga A. Barrera v. Sec. Bldg. & Inv. Corp.
  519 F.2d 1166· 5th Cir.· 1975-09-25 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the non-judicial foreclosure of a deed of trust, even when regulated by state statute, does not constitute state action for purposes of a Fourteenth Amendment due process claim.
• Rust v. Johnson
  597 F.2d 174· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-10 ·cited 17×
  The City's foreclosure on a street improvement bond was an unconstitutional exercise of state power over property of the United States because it failed to protect the federal interest held by FNMA, violating the supremacy clause.
• First Am. Title Ins. Co. v. United States
  848 F.2d 969· 9th Cir.· 1988-06-02 ·cited 16×
  The court held that equitable principles under California law could allow a senior lienholder's lien to survive a nonjudicial foreclosure sale, even without notice to the IRS, and thus the district court erred in dismissing the claim.
• 281-300 Joint Venture v. Onion
  938 F.2d 35· 5th Cir.· 1991-06-12 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the action on prudential grounds and properly refused to enjoin the RTC's foreclosure sale, as statutory provisions and agency determinations barred such relief.
• Colo. Prop. Acquisitions, Inc. v. United States
  894 F.2d 1173· 10th Cir.· 1990-01-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the statutory method of delivery for a notice of nonjudicial foreclosure to the IRS (registered or certified mail or personal service) is mandatory, and failure to comply renders the notice invalid.
• Luisa Lehner v. United States
  685 F.2d 1187· 9th Cir.· 1982-09-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that sovereign immunity barred tort claims and monetary contract claims against the United States due to failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and that the due process claim failed because the plaintiff had actual notice of the foreclosure sale.
• Symon v. Charleston Cap. Corp. & Carl R. Pennington, Jr.
  242 So. 2d 765· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-12-11 ·cited 14×
  A mortgagee is not required to obtain a deficiency judgment on a foreclosed North Carolina mortgage before foreclosing a separate Florida mortgage securing the same debt.
• Savers Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Horst R. Reetz and Kathleen K. Reetz
  888 F.2d 1497· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Texas law dictates that the credit on a debt for deficiency judgment purposes is the amount received at a valid nonjudicial foreclosure sale, not the property's fair market value, unless there was an irregularity in the sale contributing to an inadequate price
• S. Bank OF Lauderdale Cnty. v. Internal Revenue Serv.
  770 F.2d 1001· 11th Cir.· 1985-09-13 ·cited 10×
  A nonjudicial foreclosure sale conducted without proper notice to the United States, as required by 26 U.S.C. § 7425(b), does not disturb the federal tax lien, and the lien is elevated from its junior status.
• Warren v. Gov't Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n
  443 F.2d 624· 8th Cir.· 1971-06-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while abstention was appropriate due to uncertain state law, dismissal was improper; the federal court should retain jurisdiction and stay proceedings pending state court resolution.
• Abbott Bldg. Corp., Inc. v. United States
  951 F.2d 191· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-06 ·cited 9×
  The court held that while the district court had jurisdiction over the claim against FSLIC, the appellants failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted against either FSLIC or Western Title Co.
• Whitehead v. Derwinski
  904 F.2d 1362· 9th Cir.· 1990-06-04 ·cited 9×
  The VA's independent right to indemnity under federal law does not displace Washington's antideficiency law when Washington provides a foreclosure method (judicial foreclosure) that allows the VA to recover its losses through subrogation.
• In re E. Side Invs. v. E. Side Invs.
  694 F.2d 242· 11th Cir.· 1982-12-20 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the promissory notes were collected by or through an attorney within the meaning of Georgia law, entitling the holder to attorney's fees despite the debt being resolved through bankruptcy proceedings.
• Fritz B. Boyette v. Reliable Fin. Co.
  184 So. 2d 200· Fla. 2d DCA· 1966-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Trustee failed to present sufficient evidence to support claims of fraud or depressed bidding due to lease assignment.
• Phillips v. Chas. Schreiner Bank & Schreiner Bancshares
  894 F.2d 127· 5th Cir.· 1990-01-31 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court's order prohibiting foreclosure proceedings was an injunction issued in violation of Fed.R.Civ.P. 65 and the Anti-Injunction Act, requiring reversal.
• Vail v. Derwinski
  946 F.2d 589· 8th Cir.· 1991-10-08 ·cited 6×
  The VA's right of indemnity survives Minnesota's anti-deficiency statute, but the VA must make a good faith effort to provide personal notice to the veteran before foreclosing non-judicially.
• Charmicor, Inc. v. Deaner
  572 F.2d 694· 9th Cir.· 1978-03-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Nevada's nonjudicial foreclosure statute does not constitute state action, and therefore does not violate due process or equal protection rights.
• United States v. Gish
  559 F.2d 572· 9th Cir.· 1977-08-23 ·cited 6×
  The SBA can recover a deficiency judgment after a nonjudicial foreclosure sale, even if a state statute prohibits it, when the loan documents explicitly provide for federal law to govern and for the borrower to be liable for any deficiency.
• United States v. Stewart
  523 F.2d 1070· 9th Cir.· 1975-09-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government is bound by the negotiated terms of the loan instruments, including the choice of California law, which prohibits deficiency judgments in this context.
• Connelly v. Derwinski
  961 F.2d 129· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-01 ·cited 4×
  Oregon's anti-deficiency statute is preempted by Department of Veterans Affairs regulations, which authorize the VA to collect deficiencies on VA-guaranteed home loans.
• United States v. Wynn
  528 F.2d 1048· 5th Cir.· 1976-03-18 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's dismissal was premature because the Wynns may have waived their due process rights by agreeing to the loan terms, and the government is entitled to an opportunity to prove this waiver.
• Mission BAY Campland, Inc. v. Sumner Fin. Corp.
  731 F.2d 768· 11th Cir.· 1984-05-07 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the foreclosure and transfer of MBC's assets were fraudulent conveyances and that SFC could recover attorney's fees from the fraudulently transferred fund.
• In re Victor Builders, Inc. v. C. J. Carlson and Trustee
  418 F.2d 880· 9th Cir.· 1969-11-06 ·cited 2×
  The bankruptcy court has the power to enjoin a non-judicial foreclosure sale to determine if the debtor has equity in the property, and remanding for such a determination is proper.
• United States v. Fid. Cap. Corp.
  888 F.2d 1344· 11th Cir.· 1989-11-24 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the district court's judgment barring foreclosure was unsupported by adequate findings of fact regarding the abuse of Fidelity's corporate form.
• Carter v. Derwinski
  987 F.2d 611· 9th Cir.· 1993-03-04
  The VA retains an independent federal right of indemnity against veterans for amounts paid on loan guarantees, regardless of state foreclosure procedures or deficiency judgment laws.
• Douglas v. NCNB Tex. Nat'l Bank
  979 F.2d 1128· 5th Cir.· 1992-12-30
  The court held that the compulsory counterclaim rule did not bar the FDIC from collecting on promissory notes because Texas law allows lenders to pursue nonjudicial foreclosure and debtors cannot force them to elect judicial remedies.
• Little Earth OF United Tribes, Inc. v. United States Dep't OF Hous. & Urban Dev.
  878 F.2d 236· 8th Cir.· 1989-06-23
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no clear error in its findings of fact or law regarding HUD's actions and foreclosure.
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Kerr
  859 F.2d 1226· 5th Cir.· 1988-11-15
  The court held that the FSLIC, as a receiver holding an inferior lien, cannot prevent a superior lienholder from conducting a non-judicial foreclosure sale without court approval.
• Levine v. Stein
  560 F.2d 1175· 4th Cir.· 1977-08-30
  The court held that the Virginia statutes authorizing non-judicial foreclosure sales do not involve sufficient state action to support a federal constitutional claim under the Fourteenth Amendment.
• United States v. Garney White
  543 F.2d 1139· 5th Cir.· 1976-12-13
  The court granted the petition for rehearing and remanded the case to the district court to determine if the mortgagors waived their rights and, if not, whether the foreclosure procedure was constitutional.