Background
Robert Dwayne Harris appealed a final foreclosure judgment entered in favor of Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, as well as the denial of rehearing and the denial of his request to enjoin the foreclosure sale.
Although Harris was served with the foreclosure complaint and filed responsive pleadings, he did not receive notice of the foreclosure trial until after it had occurred. He raised the lack of notice to the circuit court twice, including through a rehearing motion. Nationstar conceded on appeal that Harris was entitled to a new foreclosure trial.
The Court’s Holding
The Sixth District reversed the final foreclosure judgment and remanded for further proceedings. It held that the absence of notice deprived Harris of an opportunity to be heard on his defenses and therefore violated procedural due process. The court accepted Nationstar’s concession that the judgment had to be vacated and a new trial conducted.
The court did not reach Harris’s remaining arguments concerning his motion to dismiss, the merits of his defenses, or rehearing. It affirmed the denial of Harris’s motion to enjoin the foreclosure sale because the sale had already occurred before the motion was heard, making injunctive relief moot. The reversal of the foreclosure judgment, however, gave the parties grounds to seek relief from the sale in circuit court.
Key Takeaways
- A foreclosure judgment entered after a borrower receives no notice of the trial must be vacated for lack of due process.
- Notice of the complaint does not substitute for notice of the trial itself.
- A request to stop a foreclosure sale is moot once the sale has occurred, but vacatur of the underlying judgment may support later relief from the sale.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that foreclosure litigants must receive meaningful notice of the trial and an opportunity to present their defenses. A lender’s concession that trial notice was not provided can require reversal even where the borrower participated earlier in the case.