Patterson v. Citimortgage, Inc., 1:11-cv-00339

Patterson obtained a $550,000 loan from CitiMortgage secured by a Security Deed to Breedlove's property; MERS is named as nominee.
Patterson/SameDayHouseBuyers engaged in short sale negotiations with CitiMortgage through CitiMortgage representative Todd Stone, later replaced by Lee Riley.
September 19, 2008 letter erroneously stated a payoff of $113,968.45 due to Stone's clerical error; CitiMortgage later sought $423,940 payoff.
Closing occurred October 23, 2008 with funds disbursed for $113,968.45; the error was discovered and CitiMortgage rejected that amount, wiring it back.
Plaintiffs filed suit in December 2010 seeking to enjoin foreclosure, enforce the payoff, quiet title, and recover damages and fees; CitiMortgage moved for summary judgment.
Court grants in part and denies in part the motion, staying wrongful foreclosure & related issues pending Georgia Supreme Court questions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the September 19 Letter created a binding contract.	Breedlove/Patterson contend the letter is a binding contract.	CitiMortgage argues no meeting of the minds; the letter was a clerical error.	No valid contract; clerical error prevented mutual assent.
Whether CitiMortgage owed a duty to avoid wrongful foreclosure based on the September 19 Letter.	Claim premised on the letter as the governing duty.	No duty since the letter was not a valid contract.	Wrongful foreclosure claim dismissed pending Georgia Supreme Court questions.
Whether MERS had standing to foreclose when not holding the note.	MERS/assignment not sufficient to foreclose.	Security Deed gives MERS power of sale to foreclose.	Court acknowledges split of authority; stays ruling on this issue pending state Supreme Court resolution.
Whether CitiMortgage tortiously interfered with Patterson/Breedlove's contract.	CitiMortgage breached implied contract interests.	CitiMortgage had a direct economic interest and was not a stranger.	Not liable; no tortious interference given CitiMortgage's interest.
Whether Plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief or attorney’s fees.	Injunction and fees warranted due to wrongful conduct.	No basis given valid contract; fees/injunction improper.	Injunctive relief denied; punitive damages and attorney’s fees granted only to CitiMortgage counterclaims.

BellSouth Adver. & Publ’g Corp. v. McCollum, 209 Ga. App. 441, 444, 433 S.E.2d 437 (1993) (Ga. App. 1993) (parol evidence admissible to show no valid agreement exists; not to contradict a valid writing; writing must be in writing.)
Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Nat’l Collegiate Athletic Ass’n., 250 Ga. 391, 395, 297 S.E.2d 733 (1982) (Ga. 1982) (extrinsic evidence relevant to mutual assent and contract formation when terms are disputed.)
Decision One Mortg. Co. v. Victor Warren Props., Inc., 304 Ga. App. 423, 696 S.E.2d 145 (2010) (Ga. App. 2010) (discusses unilateral mistake vs. mutual assent in contract formation.)
Malin v. Servisco, Inc., 172 Ga. App. 418, 323 S.E.2d 278 (1984) (Ga. App. 1984) (consideration of contract terms and mutual assent in contract analysis.)
Davis v. United American Life Ins. Co., 215 Ga. 521, 111 S.E.2d 488 (1959) (Ga. 1959) (classic contract formation principles and parol evidence considerations.)
DeGolyer v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC, 291 Ga. App. 444, 662 S.E.2d 141 (2008) (Ga. App. 2008) (elements of wrongful foreclosure claim (duty, breach, causation, damages).)