Deutsche Bank National Trust v. Brumbaugh
2012 OK 3
Okla.2012Background
- Foreclosure action filed by Deutsche Bank National Trust as Trustee for Long Beach Mortgage Loan 2002-1 against Dennis Brumbaugh and others based on a note and mortgage with Long Beach Mortgage Company.
- 2006 loan modification with U.S. Bank, N.A. as successor trustee for the same trust entity.
- Divorce in 2007 and 2008 quitclaim deed from Debra Brumbaugh to Dennis Brumbaugh.
- Appellant defaulted in January 2009; petition for foreclosure filed June 2, 2009 with attached note, mortgage, loan modification, and lien statements.
- Appellee claimed it was the holder or otherwise entitled to enforce the note via mesne assignments or servicing transfers; Appellant challenged standing and attachment authenticity.
- Summary judgment granted January 27, 2011; court found Appellee holder due to possession and blank indorsement; appellate court reversed and remanded for determination of when Appellee became a person entitled to enforce.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Appellee has standing to foreclose | Brumbaugh contends Appellee lacks proof of ownership/possession. | Brumbaugh argues no valid chain of title or indorsement linking Appellee to the note. | Summary judgment reversed; genuine fact issue as to when Appellee became holder. |
| Whether Appellee is a 'person entitled to enforce' the note | Appellee possesses the note and has an indorsement (blank) to enforce. | Insufficient evidence of negotiation/holding or proper indorsement connecting Appellee to the note. | Remand to determine timing of Appellee's status as holder or rights-holder. |
| Whether the action should be dismissed or refiled if Appellee acquires interest post-filing | If Appellee becomes an enforcee after filing, action may be dismissed without prejudice and refiled. | Not explicitly argued; focus remains on standing and enforceability. | Court left open dismissal/refile as a possibility upon establishing proper interest timing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of the Estate of Doan, 1986 OK 15, 727 P.2d 574 (Okla. 1986) (standing requires direct, immediate, substantial interest)
- Hendrick v. Walters, 1998 OK 162, 865 P.2d 1232 (Okla. 1998) (standing as a legal right to seek relief may be raised at any stage)
- Fent v. Contingency Review Board, 2007 OK 27, 163 P.3d 512 (Okla. 2007) (three threshold standing elements; can be raised sua sponte)
- Gill v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Oklahoma City, 1945 OK 181, 195 Okla. 607, 159 P.2d 717 (Okla. 1945) (standing to commence foreclosure requires right to enforce the note)
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (U.S. 1992) (injury-in-fact and standing principles apply to determine personal stake)