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.

Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Parker

Superior Court of Delaware, Kent

March 30, 2017

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Plaintiff,
v.
ROY E. PARKER and TAMMY L. GENNA, Defendants.

          Submitted: March 3, 2017

         Upon Consideration of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment GRANTED

          Daniel T. Conway, Esquire, Atlantic Law Group, LLC, Georgetown, Delaware for Plaintiff.

          Roy E. Parker, III, Pro se.

          Melissa L. Dill, Esquire, Liguori & Morris, Dover, Delaware for Tammy L. Genna, Defendant.

          ORDER

          Robert B. Young, Judge

          SUMMARY

         Nationstar Mortgage, LLC ("Plaintiff) filed this Motion for Summary Judgment against Roy E. Parker and Tammy L. Genna ("Defendants") in a scire facias sur mortgage action. Plaintiff has met its summary judgment burden by demonstrating that there is no genuine issue of material fact. Defendants have not met their summary judgment burden of showing that there are genuine issues of material fact. Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Thus, Plaintiffs motion is GRANTED.

         FACTS AND PROCEDURE

         On July 31, 2013, Defendant Roy E. Parker executed and delivered a mortgage to Cape Bank for a property in Camden Wyoming, Delaware. Plaintiff asserts that this mortgage was eventually assigned to it. Plaintiff further asserts that Defendants have failed to pay the monthly installments of the mortgage when due.

         Plaintiff demanded that Defendants make their mortgage payments in a demand letter dated November 17, 2015, indicating that acceleration of the sum secured by the instant mortgage was proper in this instance. To date Defendants still have not cured the alleged default.

         Plaintiff filed the Complaint on June 15, 2016. On February 14, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants did not respond to the motion.

         STANDARD OF REVIEW

         Summary judgment is appropriate where the record exhibits no genuine issue of material fact, and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.[1] This Court shall consider the "pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any" in deciding the motion.[2] The moving party bears the initial burden of demonstrating the nonexistence of material issues of fact.[3] The burden then shifts to the nonmoving party to show that there are material issues of fact in dispute.[4] The Court views the record in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.[5] When material facts are in dispute, or "it seems desirable to inquire more thoroughly into the facts, to clarify the application of the law to the ...


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.