Sonnett v. Lankford
682 F. App'x 639
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- George and Wendy Sonnett bought ~20 acres from Elk Ridge and gave a mortgage; they later defaulted.
- Elk Ridge obtained a judicial foreclosure judgment (April 22, 2010); the Sonnetts appealed to the Wyoming Supreme Court.
- Elk Ridge purchased the property at the sheriff’s sale as sole bidder; after the redemption period passed, Sheriff Lankford issued a Sheriff’s Deed to Elk Ridge (Feb. 10, 2011).
- The Sonnetts sought to void the deed in state court, arguing the sheriff lacked authority and that Wyo. Stat. § 1-17-321 requires court confirmation; the state courts rejected these challenges and affirmed the foreclosure.
- The Sonnetts sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in federal court claiming a due process violation based on alleged state-law noncompliance (and sought a declaratory judgment). The district court granted summary judgment for defendants; the Sonnetts appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether issuance of the Sheriff’s Deed without court confirmation violated Sonnetts’ due process rights | Sonnetts: state law (and precedents) require confirmation of execution sales in foreclosures; failure to confirm deprived them of a protected property interest | Defendants: Wyoming law does not require confirmation for judicial foreclosure sales; sheriff complied with statutes | Court: No protected property interest remained after redemption period and Wyoming law does not require confirmation; defendants entitled to judgment |
| Whether Wyo. Stat. § 1-17-321 applies to judicial foreclosure sales | Sonnetts: § 1-17-321 (requiring confirmation) should apply to foreclosure execution sales | Defendants: § 1-17-321 governs execution sales in aid of judgments, not foreclosures; foreclosure statutes control | Court: Declined to expand statute’s plain language; § 1-17-321 does not apply to foreclosure sales |
| Whether Wyoming case law creates a constitutional right to a confirmation hearing after a judicial sale | Sonnetts: prior cases establish a right to confirmation hearing following judicial sale | Defendants: Cited cases distinguishable and do not establish such a right | Court: Reviewed authorities and found no such right under Wyoming law |
| Whether inadequacy of sale price invalidates the sheriff’s sale | Sonnetts: alleged bid was grossly inadequate (raised below) | Defendants: inadequacy insufficient to void sale; issue not pressed on appeal | Court: District court treated it as irrelevant on appeal and did not decide further |
Key Cases Cited
- Sannerud v. Brantz, 928 P.2d 477 (Wyo. 1996) (describing mortgagee remedies: foreclosure and public sale by power of sale or judicial sale)
- In re RB, 294 P.3d 24 (Wyo. 2013) (court will not expand plain statutory language beyond legislative text)
- Elk Ridge Lodge, Inc. v. Sonnett, 254 P.3d 957 (Wyo. 2011) (Wyoming Supreme Court affirmed the foreclosure judgment)