Roman v. Wells Fargo Bank
143 So. 3d 489
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Romans defaulted on a mortgage with Wells Fargo and Wells Fargo obtained a summary final judgment of foreclosure.
- Romans challenged Wells Fargo’s notice of default, arguing they did not receive the notice.
- The mortgage language required that Wells Fargo mail notice, but did not require actual receipt by Borrower.
- Wells Fargo submitted testimony that the notice was mailed to the Romans as required by the mortgage.
- The trial court denied the genuine issue of material fact and entered summary judgment; the appeals court affirms.
- The court notes multiple authorities holding that mailing, not actual receipt, can satisfy notice requirements where the mortgage contemplates mailing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether non-receipt of notice precludes summary judgment | Romans | Wells Fargo | No; notice via mailing suffices under the mortgage |
Key Cases Cited
- Coleman v. BAC Servicing, 104 So.3d 195 (Ala.Civ.App.2012) (rejected argument that receipt is required when mailing suffices)
- Griffin v. Bierman, 403 Md. 186, 941 A.2d 475 (2008) (mortgage provisions deeming mailing as notice does not violate due process)