Winona Flippon Vazquez v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, N.A.
2014 Tex. App. LEXIS 8102
| Tex. App. | 2014Background
- Vazquez owned a Houston home and borrowed from Argent Mortgage; Argent held a note and deed of trust with Citi as servicer under a limited power of attorney.
- An assignment of the note and deed of trust to Deutsche Bank bears Bly’s purported signature as vice president and was recorded in Harris County.
- Deutsche Bank foreclosed non-judicially; Vazquez filed suit seeking rescission and to quiet title, challenging the assignment's validity.
- Bank moved for summary judgment arguing Vazquez lacked standing to challenge the assignment; the trial court granted summary judgment for the bank.
- Vazquez argued the assignment was void due to forgery or unauthorized signatures; the court must determine standing to challenge void/invalid deed assignments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to challenge void/invalid assignment | Vazquez has standing to challenge the assignment that affects her title. | Deutsche Bank argues Vazquez has no standing because she is not a party to the assignment. | Vazquez has standing to pursue a quiet-title claim. |
| Forgery as grounds for void assignment | Petition and evidence show Bly’s signature may be forged, rendering the assignment void. | Forgery not properly alleged; issues were only about unauthorized signing or voidable transfer. | Pleading and evidence raise forgery as a basis to challenge validity; summary judgment improper on standing alone. |
| Government Code claim viability | Assignment filings under Government Code section 51.901 render the lien/transfer void. | Code § 51.901 applies only to liens filings, not to transfers of property interests. | Government Code claim affirmed as to the filing issue was not reversible; the court leaves this denial undisturbed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Reinagel v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co., 735 F.3d 220 (5th Cir. 2013) (mortgagor standing to challenge assignment; generally allows challenge to void assignments)
- Tri-Cities Construction, Inc. v. American National Insurance Co., 523 S.W.2d 426 (Tex. Civ. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1975) (mortgagor may defend on grounds rendering assignment void; supports standing premise)
- Glass v. Carpenter, 330 S.W.2d 530 (Tex. Civ. App.—San Antonio 1959) (assignment validity and standing principles in void/voidable context)
- Nobles v. Marcus, 533 S.W.2d 923 (Tex. 1976) (forgery concept and authority over signatures in real property documents)
- DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Inman, 252 S.W.3d 299 (Tex. 2008) (standing requires concrete, particularized injury; plaintiff must be aggrieved)