Summary
The Louisiana Court of Appeal affirmed the denial of Gail Marie Vance’s request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary or permanent injunction challenging a foreclosure sale and anticipated eviction. The court held that, after the executory-process sale was completed and recorded, Louisiana law barred using alleged procedural defects or lack of authentic evidence to obtain injunctive relief in eviction proceedings, and that a substantive defect could not be raised through such eviction-related injunctive relief.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court erred in denying Vance's request for a temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunctions.
- Whether, after the sheriff's sale had been completed and recorded, Vance could use injunctive relief in eviction proceedings to challenge alleged defects in the executory-process foreclosure, including lack of standing, fraud, defects of form or procedure, lack of authentic evidence, or substantive defects.
Holdings
- Under La. R.S. 13:4112, a defendant may not use an action to annul or injunctive relief in eviction proceedings to challenge defects of form or procedure or the lack of authentic evidence supporting an executory-process seizure after the property has been seized and sold and the sale has been recorded.
- A defendant may not raise a claim of substantive defect by seeking injunctive relief against a potential or actual eviction proceeding brought by the new owner; the asserted substantive defect must be pursued through an appropriate direct action to annul, subject to applicable limitations.
- The trial court did not err in denying Vance's request for injunctive relief.
Key quotations
“A sale through executory process can be attacked, by direct action filed after the sale has been completed, for defects in the proceedings that are substantive in character and that strike at the foundation of the executory proceeding.” (at 138)
“Pursuant to La. R.S. 13:4112, a defendant cannot contest defects of form or procedure in the foreclosure proceeding, after the property has been seized and sold, and after the sale has been recorded, to obtain injunctive relief in her eviction proceedings.” (at 139)
Factual background
Vance purchased residential property secured by a promissory note and mortgage and defaulted on payments beginning in May 2008. After multiple foreclosure delays, including two Chapter 13 bankruptcy filings that Vance voluntarily dismissed, the property was sold by judicial sale to FNMA on August 6, 2014, and the sheriff's deed was recorded on August 26, 2014. Vance thereafter sought a temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunctions to prevent eviction and argued that FNMA lacked standing and had acted fraudulently.
Procedural history
Chase filed an executory-process foreclosure proceeding after Vance defaulted on her mortgage payments. Two scheduled sales were set aside after Vance filed and then voluntarily dismissed Chapter 13 bankruptcy petitions. The property was ultimately sold by judicial sale to FNMA on August 6, 2014, and the sheriff's deed was recorded on August 26, 2014. Vance then sought injunctive relief to prevent anticipated eviction and challenge the sale; the trial court denied relief, and the Court of Appeal affirmed. The court also noted that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on Vance's motion for new trial after the appeal had been granted.