Morris v. American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc.
360 S.W.3d 32
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- Morris and spouse purchased a home in Sugar Land, Texas, secured by a deed of trust naming Option One Mortgage Corporation as lender and James L. Robertson as trustee.
- Section 22 of the deed authorizes foreclosure by the lender and trustee using the most expeditious means; possession after sale is to be surrendered to the purchaser, or the former borrower becomes a tenant at sufferance subject to writ of possession.
- The note and lien were later assigned to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; Wells Fargo’s servicing agent, AHMS, foreclosed and was the winning bidder; substitute trustee’s deed identifies AHMS.
- AHMS filed a forcible detainer action in justice court seeking possession; justice court entered judgment for AHMS, which Morris appealed to the county court at law.
- Morris argued lack of jurisdiction due to a pending title dispute and contended that possession could not be resolved without resolving that title dispute; the county court trial also addressed these issues and awarded possession to AHMS; Morris appeals challenging jurisdiction and due process.
- The court ultimately affirmed, holding that possession could be determined without quieting title and that Morris received proper notice and a hearing, with no due process violation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jurisdiction to decide possession despite potential title dispute | Morris argues lack of jurisdiction due to title dispute | AHMS proves standing as Wells Fargo’s servicing agent and landlord-tenant relation exists | Jurisdiction exists; possession can be decided without quieting title |
| Right to a fair hearing | Morris claims due process violation and lack of opportunity to present evidence | Notice and hearing provided; foreclosure issues not considered in forcible detainer | No due process violation; issue waived or adequately addressed by record |
Key Cases Cited
- Tex. Ass'n of Bus. v. Tex. Air Control Bd., 852 S.W.2d 440 (Tex.1993) (subject-matter jurisdiction reviewed de novo; pleadings construe in pleader's favor)
- Tex. Dep't of Parks & Wildlife v. Miranda, 133 S.W.3d 217 (Tex.2004) (legal standards for jurisdiction and review on appeal)
- Villalon v. Bank One, 176 S.W.3d 66 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no pet.) (forcible detainer requires no title resolution if landlord-tenant relationship exists)
- Aspenwood Apartment Corp. v. Coinmach, Inc., 349 S.W.3d 621 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, no pet. h.) (landlord-tenant relationship permits determining possession without title adjudication)
- Mitchell v. Armstrong Capital Corp., 911 S.W.2d 169 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, writ denied) (possession may be decided without quieting title when a title dispute is not necessary to determine possession)
- McGlothlin v. Kliebert, 672 S.W.2d 231 (Tex.1984) (forcible detainer is cumulative of other remedies, including suit to try title)
- Hong Kong Dev., Inc. v. Nguyen, 229 S.W.3d 415 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2007, no pet.) (forcible detainer may proceed concurrently with title dispute; not dependent on quieting title)
- Rice v. Pinney, 51 S.W.3d 705 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2001, no pet.) (forecl. actions with rental rights can still support possession claims)
- Murphy v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 199 S.W.3d 441 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. denied) (foreclosure challenges not reviewable in forcible detainer)
- Republic Underwriters, Inc. v. Mex-Tex, Inc., 150 S.W.3d 423 (Tex.2004) (acknowledges breadth of remedies; forcible detainer is cumulative)
- Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (U.S.1966) (due process requirements; notice and hearing)