Bankruptcy

One of the Rarest Opinions You’re Ever Likely to See. An Appellate Court Reversing a Deutsche Bank Foreclosure Providing a Win in Favor of the Homeowner (2014)

The Lacombes, defendants below, appeal the final judgment of foreclosure  against them and in favor of Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., as Trustee for  Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-2 Deutsche Bank Appellants assert that the evidence presented at the bench trial was insufficient to support the trial court’s judgment because Deutsche Bank’s documents and witness did not prove the bank’s standing to bring the foreclosure action. We agree and the judgment is thus reversed.

The Lacombes, defendants below, appeal the final judgment of foreclosure  against them and in favor of Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., as Trustee for  Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-2 (“Deutsche Bank”). Appellants assert that the evidence presented at the bench trial was insufficient to support the trial court’s judgment because Deutsche Bank’s documents and witness did not prove the bank’s standing to bring the foreclosure action.

We agree and the judgment is thus reversed.

Because the final judgment was based on a bench trial and Appellants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment, the general rule requiring specific contemporaneous objection to preserve the asserted error for appeal does not apply.

Rather, rule 1.530(e), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure allows review of the sufficiency of the evidence despite any deficiencies in the objections made at trial and absence of post-trial motions. Rule 1.530(e) applies to appeals challenging the sufficiency of the evidence in mortgage foreclosure actions after bench trial. See Correa v. U.S. Bank N.A., 118 So. 3d 952, 954 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). Accordingly, Appellants’ challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence is properly before this court.

We review the sufficiency of the evidence to prove standing to bring a foreclosure action de novo. Dixon v. Express Equity Lending Grp., 125 So. 3d 965 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013).

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Most Popular

Laws In Texas is a blog about the Financial Crisis and how the banks and government are colluding against the citizens and homeowners of the State of Texas and relying on a system of #FakeDocs and post-crisis legal precedents, specially created by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to foreclose on homeowners around this great State. We are not lawyers. We do not offer legal advice. We are citizens of the State of Texas who have spent a decade in the court system in Texas and have been party to during this period to the good, the bad and the very ugly.

Donate to LawsInTexas. Make a Difference.

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

We keep your data private and share your data only with third parties that make this service possible. See our Privacy Policy for more information.

© 2020-21 LawInTexas com is an online trading name which is wholly owned by Blogger Inc., a nonprofit 501(c)(3) registered in Delaware. | All Rights Reserved.

To Top