Harbin v. Roundpoint Mortgage Company
2:15-cv-01069
| N.D. Ala. | Mar 27, 2018Background
- Harbin executed a $116,999 note with First Guaranty in Nov. 2012; RoundPoint began servicing the loan in Dec. 2012.
- Harbin defaulted Oct. 1, 2014; RoundPoint repeatedly solicited loss-mitigation documents; Harbin submitted incomplete materials and later additional documents in 2015.
- Forbearance postponed an April 27, 2015 sale to June 3, 2015 after Harbin paid $100; on May 29, 2015 a RoundPoint employee told Harbin the foreclosure was "suspended temporarily." Harbin asked for confirmation about postponement but received no clear written postponement.
- Foreclosure sale occurred on June 3, 2015; First Guaranty purchased the property. Harbin had not provided a complete mitigation package and the property had HOA liens.
- First Guaranty later sought ejectment in state court; temporary lockout/rekeyings occurred in Aug. 2016 but Harbin’s personal property was not disturbed and she retains possession; several claims were voluntarily dismissed by plaintiff during briefing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Breach of contract (postponement of sale) | Harbin contends an agreement barred foreclosure past June 3, 2015 (inference from communications and mitigation process). | No enforceable contract: no mutual assent, essential terms, or consideration; application incomplete. | Judgment for defendants — no valid contract formed and Harbin did not perform. |
| Fraud / Promissory fraud (promise to postpone sale) | Gerstenfeld’s statements led Harbin to believe the June 3 sale was postponed; relied to her detriment. | Statements were at most a temporary suspension; no evidence of intent to deceive or that promise existed as an enforceable commitment. | Judgment for defendants — no substantial evidence of fraudulent intent or reasonable reliance; promissory fraud fails. |
| Validity of foreclosure / wrongful foreclosure-related relief | Foreclosure was wrongful because sale should have been postponed; therefore subsequent actions (e.g., lockout) were improper. | Harbin defaulted, foreclosure procedures were followed, sale was valid; First Guaranty obtained title lawfully. | Judgment for defendants — foreclosure valid; wrongful-foreclosure theory and related claims fail. |
| Tort claims after sale (negligence/wantonness, conversion, trespass, unjust enrichment) | First Guaranty wrongfully locked Harbin out, converted property, was unjustly enriched, and trespassed while litigation pending. | After valid foreclosure, First Guaranty had legal right to possession and to secure the property; no evidence of damage, conversion, or retained benefit. | Judgment for defendants — no duty or damages shown for negligence/wantonness; conversion/trespass/unjust enrichment fail. |
Key Cases Cited
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (Supreme Court) (summary judgment standard)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (Supreme Court) (genuine-issue standard for trial)
- Shaffer v. Regions Fin. Corp., 29 So. 3d 872 (Ala. 2009) (elements of breach-of-contract under Alabama law)
- Ex parte Grant, 711 So. 2d 464 (Ala. 1997) (contract formation and consideration under Alabama law)
- Southland Bank v. A & A Drywall Supply Co., 21 So. 3d 1196 (Ala. 2008) (promissory fraud and promises about future performance)