Howser Mill Homes, LLC v. Branch Banking & Trust Co., 318 Ga. App. 148

BB&T foreclosed on Howser Mill’s property nonjudicially on July 1, 2008 under a security deed.
BB&T filed for confirmation of the July sale on July 29, 2008 but voluntarily dismissed in Oct. 2008 after discovering improper notice of the foreclosure sale.
BB&T conducted a new foreclosure proceeding, advertised the sale, and, in November 2008, BB&T purchased the property and sought confirmation of that sale.
Howser Mill objected to the November sale by arguing that no court order was obtained under OCGA § 44-14-161(c) to authorize a resale.
The trial court held that no resale order was required and confirmed the November sale; it also addressed—though not on the merits—Howser Mill’s challenge to the July sale’s validity due to notice issues, ultimately affirming the November sale confirmation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a court order was required before the November sale under OCGA 44-14-161	Howser Mill: sale required court order prior to resale	BB&T: no such order needed under circumstances	No order required; November sale valid and confirmable
Validity of the July sale and its impact on the November sale	July sale void for improper notice	July sale voidable but cured by subsequent proper sale	July sale was invalid for notice; however, BB&T cured the defect with the November sale, which was properly conducted and confirmed

Proudfit v. Oliver, 150 Ga. 707 ((1920)) (advertisement defects render foreclosure invalid; sale does not divest title)
132 Ga. 296, 132 Ga. 296 ((1909)) (early rule on validity of foreclosures lacking proper advertisement)
Friedman v. Regions Bank, 288 Ga. App. 57 ((2007)) (court notes requirements for advertising and sale procedures)
Duke Galish, LLC v. Southcrest Bank, 314 Ga. App. 801 ((2012)) (validity and consequences where lender is purchaser at an invalid sale)
175 Ga. App. 75, 175 Ga. App. 75 ((1985)) (treatment of void or voidable sales and resales)