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.

Bayview Loan Servicing LLC v. Edwards

Superior Court of Delaware

March 13, 2017

BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING LLC, Plaintiff,
v.
JACQUELINE EDWARDS A/K/A JACQUELINE A. EDWARDS, Defendant.

          Submitted: December 20, 2016

         Upon Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment GRANTED

          ORDER

          Andrea L. Rocanelli, Judge

         This is a mortgage foreclosure case. Upon consideration of the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff Bayview Loan Servicing LLC ("Plaintiff); the Response in Opposition filed by Defendant Jacqueline Edwards ("Defendant"); the Superior Court Civil Rules; the facts, arguments, and authorities set forth by the parties; statutory and decisional law; and the entire record in this case, the Court hereby finds as follows:

         1. On March 7, 2006, Defendant executed and delivered a valid Mortgage and Note to CitiFinancial, Inc. for property located in Wilmington, Delaware. The Mortgage permits the Mortgage holder to foreclose on the property upon Defendant's failure to make timely payments pursuant to the Mortgage.

          2. Defendant defaulted under the Mortgage by failing to pay required monthly installments when due. Plaintiff demanded Defendant's payment and advised Defendant of Plaintiff s intent to accelerate the balance of the Mortgage if arrearages were not paid.

         3. On January 18, 2016, CitiFinancial Servicing LLC initiated this foreclosure action seeking entry of judgment against Defendant for the principal sum owed on the Mortgage after Defendant failed to cure her default. The Mortgage is attached to CitiFinancial Servicing LLC's Complaint as "Exhibit A." Service of process was effected on Defendant.

         4. On May 3, 2016, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss CitiFinancial Servicing LLC's complaint. On May 26, 2016, Plaintiff filed a Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and a Motion to Substitute Parties and Amend Complaint.

         5. On June 7, 2016, this Court held a hearing regarding Defendant's Motion to Dismiss. During the June 7 hearing, Defendant represented to the Court that Plaintiff had engaged in self-help during the foreclosure process. Specifically, Defendant alleged that the property was entered without authorization and that the front door locks were changed. Plaintiff conceded that self-help is not an available remedy under Delaware law. The Court provided Defendant an opportunity to conduct discovery regarding her self-help claim.

          6. By Order dated June 8, 2016, this Court granted Plaintiffs Motion to Substitute Parties and Amend Complaint, and denied Defendant's Motion to Dismiss.

         7. On June 21, 2016, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint against Defendant. On July 7, 2016, service of process was effected on Defendant.

         8. On June 28, 2016, Defendant docketed photographs of a padlock on the front door of the property, a notice placed on the window, a warning that the property had been "winterized" by disconnecting the water meter, and a photograph of the kitchen sink at which the water had been shut off. Upon consideration of this evidence, this Court issued a Rule to Show Cause requesting Plaintiff to show cause as to why sanctions should not be imposed for engaging in improper self-help during the mortgage foreclosure process.

         9. On July 21, 2016, the Court held a hearing regarding the Rule to Show Cause. Plaintiff established that Defendant had failed to participate in the mortgage mediation process and that foreclosure of the property could proceed. This Court discharged the Rule to Show Cause and ordered Defendant to file an answer to Plaintiffs Amended Complaint within 20 days from the July 21 hearing.

         10. On August 10, 2016, Defendant filed an Answer to Plaintiffs Amended Complaint and raised an affirmative defense of lack of standing. Defendant argues that (1) Plaintiff fails to establish that Plaintiff is the proper party in interest to the Mortgage with authority to commence foreclosure proceedings; (2) Plaintiff failed to properly verify and validate Defendant's debt; and ...


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.