Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Quinn

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle

October 21, 2014

U.S. Bank, N.A., as trustee on behalf of Conseco Finance Home Equity Loan Trust 2002-C (owner of loan originated by Conseco Finance Servicing Corp.), Plaintiff,
v.
M. Patricia Quinn, Defendant.

Submitted: October 13, 2014

ORDER

HONORABLE ANDREA L. ROCANELLI

This case involves Plaintiff's foreclosure action for the property located at 319 Rothwell Drive, Wilmington, Delaware 19804. Plaintiff initiated the foreclosure action on November 4, 2013. On February 18, 2014, the Court entered Default Judgment in Plaintiff's favor and scheduled a Sheriff's Sale. On August 27, 2014, Defendant filed a Motion to Vacate Default Judgment pursuant to Superior Court Civil Procedure Rule 60(b)(6). The Court stayed the Sheriff's Sale by Order dated August 28, 2013, pending the resolution of this motion.

In consideration of Defendant's Motion to Vacate Default Judgment and Plaintiff's opposition thereto, the Court finds as follows:

1. In 2002, Vivian M. Quinn and John G. Quinn ("Mortgagors") executed and delivered a promissory note ("Note") and a Mortgage to secure the Note to Conseco Finance Servicing Corporation ("Mortgagee") for the property located at 319 Rothwell Drive.[1]

2. In 2007, after Mortgagors died, all rights, title, and interests in the property transferred to Defendant.

3. In 2012, the Delaware General Assembly enacted legislation establishing a Mediation Program to afford homeowners facing foreclosure an opportunity to explore alternative resolutions in lieu of foreclosure.[2] The Mediation Program encourages parties to reach a mutual agreement in order to avoid foreclosure by meeting face-to-face to discuss "loss mitigation programs . . . along with other potential resolutions that may allow the defendant to continue to own the property."[3]

4. The Mediation Program statutorily mandates mediation for properties subject to foreclosure that are: (1) owner-occupied and (2) one-to-four family primary residences, unless the seller of the property holds the mortgage.[4] Contrary to Plaintiff's assertions, the statute does not require that Defendant be the name of the borrower on the Mortgage to qualify for mediation.

5. On August 16, 2012, Mortgagee notified Defendant of its intention to foreclose on the Mortgage if Defendant did not cure the default.

6. On June 11, 2013, Mortgagee assigned the Note and Mortgage to Plaintiff as trustee. Plaintiff then notified Defendant of its intention to foreclose on the Mortgage if Defendant did not cure the default.

7. Plaintiff filed a Complaint seeking judgment on the Mortgage in rem on November 4, 2013.

8. Plaintiff alleged that this foreclosure action was not subject to the Meditation Program. 9. Defendant did not answer or appear.

10.On December 3, 2013, a Deputy Sheriff personally served Defendant with a Scire Facias Sur Mortgage. Defendant again did not answer or appear.

11.On February 18, 2014, the Prothonotary entered default judgment against Defendant upon Plaintiff's direction, pursuant to 10 Del. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.