Sally Salas and Seferino Salas v. LNV Corporation, 409 S.W.3d 209

Salas executed a home-equity loan of $92,800 in January 2004 secured by a deed of trust on their Katy, Texas home.
Note was indorsed along a chain from Argent to Ameriquest to Residential Funding to LNV, which ultimately held the note and became the deed’s beneficiary.
By March 1, 2010, Salas defaulted and were in arrears; LNV sent default notices and acceleration notices under the deed of trust.
In July 2011 LNV filed suit in the 190th District Court seeking foreclosure; Salas later sought declaratory relief and injunctive relief against foreclosure in related proceedings.
In November 2011 Salas filed suit asserting constitutional challenges under Texas Constitution Art. XVI, § 50(a)(6) and requesting declaratory relief; MGC Mortgage, LNV’s servicer, supplied loan documents and notices.
On July 2, 2012 the trial court granted LNV summary judgment foreclosing its lien and denying Salas' claims; Salas appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court erred by not filing findings of fact and conclusions of law	Salas contend the court needed findings of fact and law to support its ruling	LNV argues findings of fact/conclusions of law are inappropriate in summary judgments	Correct; no reversible error since such findings are not required in summary judgment
Whether Salas had a viable constitutional claim and standing for declaratory relief	Salas had standing and a justiciable controversy to challenge LNV’s loan/foreclosure under Art. XVI, §50(a)(6)	Salas lack standing; controversies are resolved by disputed facts outside summary judgment scope	Salas had standing and a justiciable controversy; however, court rejected merits of the constitutional claim
Whether LNV was entitled to foreclose as the current holder of the note and beneficiary of the deed of trust	Salas argued disputed note ownership and potential constitutional issues preclude foreclosure	LNV produced uncontroverted evidence of chain of assignments and loan default; foreclose authorized	LNV entitled to foreclose as matter of law; ownership/indorsement and failure-to-raise material issues were not shown

Linwood v. NCNB Tex., 885 S.W.2d 102 (Tex. 1994) (no findings in summary judgments; grounds limited to motion)
IKB Indus. (Nigeria) Ltd. v. Pro-Line Corp., 938 S.W.2d 440 (Tex. 1997) (summary judgment standards; appellate review)
Nixon v. Mr. Prop. Mgmt. Co., 690 S.W.2d 546 (Tex. 1985) (summary judgment burden on movant and nonmovant)
Haase v. Glazner, 62 S.W.3d 795 (Tex. 2001) (standards for granting summary judgment)
Centeq Realty, Inc. v. Siegler, 899 S.W.2d 195 (Tex. 1995) (burden shifting in summary-judgment practice)
Star-Telegram, Inc. v. Doe, 915 S.W.2d 471 (Tex. 1995) (summary judgments; grounds must be explicit)
Bonham State Bank v. Beadle, 907 S.W.2d 465 (Tex. 1995) (uniform declaratory judgments scope and standing)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Ballestas, 355 S.W.3d 187 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011) (standing to seek declaratory relief against note holder foreclosure)
Tarver v. Sebring Capital Credit Corp., 69 S.W.3d 708 (Tex. App.—Waco 2002) (significant for estoppel/representations in 50(a)(6) context)
Kyle v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 232 S.W.3d 355 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2007) (foreclosure proof via deed of trust and default evidence sufficient)
Doody v. Ameriquest Mortg. Co., 49 S.W.3d 342 (Tex. 2001) (50(a)(6) application standards)