Michael Maldonado v. CitiMortgage, Inc.
676 F. App'x 282
| 5th Cir. | 2017Background
- In 2006 Maldonado executed a $292,000 Texas Home Equity Note secured by a mortgage on his Houston home; ABN AMRO originally serviced the loan and later merged into CitiMortgage.
- Maldonado defaulted on payments (last payment May 2011); he received multiple notices of default between 2009–2014 and never cured the loan.
- Maldonado sued in December 2014 seeking a declaratory judgment challenging the validity/amounts of the lien; CitiMortgage removed, counterclaimed for judicial foreclosure, and moved for summary judgment.
- CitiMortgage produced an account record and an affidavit from its custodian of records stating the outstanding balance was $533,960.80 (principal, accrued interest, escrow advances, fees).
- Maldonado disputed specific line items (attorneys’ fees, inspection fees, escrow, taxes, late charges) but offered no admissible evidence (affidavits, documents) recalculating those amounts.
- The district court granted CitiMortgage summary judgment and judicial foreclosure; Maldonado’s motion to alter judgment was denied and he appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CitiMortgage is the proper holder entitled to enforce the note | Maldonado implicitly contested enforcement and amounts but did not rebut holder status | CitiMortgage became holder after merger and may enforce the note | CitiMortgage is the holder and may enforce the note |
| Whether CitiMortgage proved entitlement to judicial foreclosure | Maldonado argued Texas homestead protection and disputed amounts | CitiMortgage showed the note, security instrument, default, and identity of the property | Court held CitiMortgage met requirements for judicial foreclosure |
| Whether there is a genuine fact issue on the outstanding balance | Maldonado disputed specific charges but provided no competent evidence of correct amounts | CitiMortgage provided account records and a custodian affidavit documenting the balance | Court held Maldonado failed to raise a fact issue; summary judgment on amount was proper |
| Whether the district court erred in calculating attorneys’ fees and other line items | Maldonado relied on policy and his attorney’s affidavit limited to attorneys’ fees | CitiMortgage relied on its records and custodian affidavit for all amounts | Court rejected Maldonado’s policy argument and attorney affidavit as insufficient; affirmed calculation |
Key Cases Cited
- Trinity Universal Ins. Co. v. Emp’rs Mut. Cas. Co., 592 F.3d 687 (5th Cir. 2010) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Lynch Props., Inc. v. Potomac Ins. Co. of Illinois, 140 F.3d 622 (5th Cir. 1998) (factual controversies construed for nonmovant only when both parties present evidence)
- Howell Hydrocarbons, Inc. v. Adams, 897 F.2d 183 (5th Cir. 1990) (nonmovant must support allegations with admissible evidence)
- Wheat v. Florida Par. Juvenile Justice Comm’n, 811 F.3d 702 (5th Cir. 2016) (conclusory assertions insufficient to defeat summary judgment)
- Nissho-Iwai Am. Corp. v. Kline, 845 F.2d 1300 (5th Cir. 1988) (court will not search record on nonmovant’s behalf)
- Bonilla v. Roberson, 918 S.W.2d 17 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1996) (elements required to obtain judicial foreclosure)