326 P.3d 528
Okla. Civ. App.2013Background
- Bank sued Moon on multiple notes and mortgages in related Tulsa County actions; Moon defaulted and Bank obtained judgments and foreclosures; Bank purchased Moon's defenses, claims, and counterclaims at sheriff's sale and dismissed them with prejudice; Brown sought to intervene as assignee of Moon's rights in related actions; Moon challenged the judgments and sought to vacate, object to execution, and stay proceedings; trial court denied Moon's motion to vacate, denied Moon's objections to execution, and denied Brown's intervention; this appeal consolidated with companion cases 111,229 and 111,333.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying Moon's motion to vacate? | Moon argues there were irregularities and fraud in obtaining judgment. | Bank argues no irregularities; materials attached to amended answer were unauthorized and insufficient to defeat judgment. | No abuse; judgment properly entered and not vacated. |
| Are Moon's defenses, claims, and counterclaims assignable and subject to execution? | Moon contends those choses in action cannot be fully pursued after sale. | Bank, as purchaser, could execute on Moon's defenses and assign them; assignment defeated Moon's interests. | Choses in action arising from contract are assignable; after sheriff's sale Bank owned and could execute. |
| Did Brown have a right to intervene as assignee of Moon's claims? | Moon lacked interests post-assignment; Brown sought relief as intervenor. | Brown had an unconditional right to intervene as assignee. | Brown had no assignable interest at time of assignment; intervention not warranted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Friedman v. Craig, 2010 OK CIV APP 83, 241 P.3d 681 (OK Civil App. 2010) (vacating summary judgment due to irregularities not present when party unrepresented; response burden on court)
- Ross v. Pace, 2004 OK 13, 87 P.3d 593 (OK 2004) (deemed admissions; no abuse in declining to vacate)
- Tedford v. Divine, 1987 OK 18, 743 P.2d 283 (OK 1987) (default and delays insufficient to vacate)
- Hunter v. Echols, 1991 OK 114, 820 P.2d 450 (OK 1991) (unauthorized amended pleading treated as not filed)
- Chimney Rock Ltd. Partnership v. Hongkong Bank of Canada, 1993 OK CIV APP 94, 857 P.2d 84 (OK Civil App. 1993) (assignability of contract-based claims)
- Citizens Nat. Bank v. Dixieland Forest Products, LLC, 935 So.2d 1004 (Miss. 2006) (chooses in action subject to execution; bank can substitute as plaintiff)