Mark Trimble, Individually and as Assignee for I.B. and Mildred Henderson v. Federal National Mortgage Association
516 S.W.3d 24
| Tex. App. | 2016Background
- I.B. and Mildred Henderson defaulted on a mortgage; the property was sold at foreclosure and purchased by Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae).
- The deed of trust contained a tenancy-at-sufferance/landlord-tenant provision making borrowers tenants if a foreclosure sale occurred and requiring surrender to the purchaser.
- Fannie Mae mailed notices to vacate by certified mail (return receipt requested) and first-class mail addressed to the Hendersons and/or “All Occupants”; the Hendersons did not vacate and a justice court ordered eviction.
- Mark Trimble received an assignment of the Hendersons’ rights after the eviction order and appealed the forcible-detainer judgment de novo to the county court; Fannie Mae moved for summary judgment and the county court granted it, awarding possession.
- Trimble appealed, arguing (1) the foreclosure was void (so the courts lacked jurisdiction in the forcible-detainer action) and (2) Fannie Mae failed to give proper notice; he also contended the final judgment granted relief beyond the summary-judgment motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Trimble) | Defendant's Argument (Fannie Mae) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether county court/justice court lacked jurisdiction because the foreclosure sale was void and title disputes prevented forcible-detainer proceedings | The foreclosure was void for lack of notice, creating an intertwined title dispute that must be resolved before possession can be adjudicated | Forcible-detainer actions decide only immediate right to possession; purchaser need only show superior right to immediate possession (landlord-tenant relationship, purchase at foreclosure, proper notice, refusal to vacate); title disputes can be litigated separately in district court | Rejected. County court had jurisdiction; deed of trust and foreclosure documents established a landlord-tenant relationship and superior right to immediate possession; title challenge can proceed in district court separately |
| Whether Fannie Mae gave required notice under Tex. Prop. Code §24.005(f) | Certified-mail envelope marked "Return to Sender" and Trimble’s affidavit that he did not receive notice show lack of proper notice to occupants | Mailing notice addressed to premises (including “All Occupants”) creates a presumption of delivery; receipt by a particular person is not required; no competent evidence rebutted delivery presumption for the first-class mailing | Rejected. Presumption of delivery applied; Trimble failed to raise a fact issue showing notice to the premises was not delivered |
| Whether the county court awarded relief beyond the grounds stated in Fannie Mae’s summary-judgment motion | The final judgment awarded possession of real property and improvements though motion sought possession of the "premises" only | Fannie Mae’s motion explicitly defined “premises” to include the real property and improvements; commonly understood meaning of "premises" includes buildings | Rejected. Judgment was within the grounds and definitions set in the motion |
Key Cases Cited
- Hearts Bluff Game Ranch, Inc. v. State, 381 S.W.3d 468 (jurisdictional standard for appellate review)
- Black v. Washington Mut. Bank, 318 S.W.3d 414 (forcible-detainer decides immediate possession; tenancy-at-sufferance clause supports possession)
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Ezell, 410 S.W.3d 919 (elements purchaser must show to establish superior right to immediate possession)
- Thomas v. Ray, 889 S.W.2d 237 (presumption of mail delivery when properly addressed and mailed)
- Villalon v. Bank One, 176 S.W.3d 66 (tenancy-at-sufferance clause effective despite wrongful-foreclosure claims)
- City of Garland v. Louton, 691 S.W.2d 603 (if trial court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, appellate remedy is reversal and dismissal)