Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 2D13–3192.
| Decision Date | 10 October 2014 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D13–3192.,2D13–3192. |
| Parties | WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., as Trustee for Carrington Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2006 Frei Asset–Backed Pass–Through Certificates, Appellant, v. Calvin M. RUTLEDGE; Bruce Dias; Harbor Towers Owners Association, Inc. ; Mary Lynne Dias; Unknown Tenant(s) Possession of the Subject Property, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Curtis Herbert and Desiree B. McCarthy of Brock & Scott, PLLC, Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellant.
John C. Dent, Jr., and Jennifer A. McClain of Dent & McClain, Chartered, Sarasota, for Appellee Calvin M. Rutledge.
No Appearance for remaining Appellees.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., appeals the final summary judgment granting title to Calvin Rutledge and discharging Wells Fargo's lis pendens against the underlying property in this foreclosure action. Because we agree that Wells Fargo was not barred from pursuing foreclosure in the circuit court by laches or equitable estoppel and that material issues of fact remain as to the authenticity of Mary Dias's signature on the note and mortgage, we reverse.
Wells Fargo filed a foreclosure action in circuit court against Bruce and Mary Dias and named their homeowners association, Harbor Towers, as a defendant. Wells Fargo sought foreclosure of a note and mortgage against the Dias's home for $475,526.52. While that action remained pending in circuit court, Harbor Towers filed a second foreclosure action in county court to foreclose a lien on the same property. Harbor Towers erroneously named Wells Fargo as a defendant and junior lienholder. Wells Fargo did not participate in the second foreclosure action, and a default was entered against it in county court. The county court entered summary judgment in favor of Harbor Towers and the property was sold at public auction to Calvin Rutledge for $10,394. Rutledge filed a certificate of title with the clerk and joined the circuit court foreclosure case as a party. Thereafter, the circuit court entered a nonfinal order granting Rutledge's motion for summary judgment, finding that although Wells Fargo was improperly joined as a party to Harbor Towers' foreclosure action, see Citimortgage v. Henry, 24 So.3d 641, 643 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), it had slept on its rights by not participating in the county court case and was barred by laches and equitable estoppel from asserting its rights in the circuit court case.
The county court granted Wells Fargo's subsequent Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(4) motion to vacate the county court foreclosure judgment. Relying on Henry, 24 So.3d at 643, the county court held that Wells Fargo's mortgage interest was superior to Harbor Towers' interest and that thus, Wells Fargo was not a proper party and was not required to litigate its interest in Harbor Towers' foreclosure action. The court vacated the county court foreclosure judgment as void. This order was affirmed on appeal to the circuit court. It does not appear that Wells Fargo sought to vacate the foreclosure sale or that the sale was ever vacated. See generally Palacios v. Fla. Funding Trust, 32 So.3d 167, 169 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010).
Meanwhile, Rutledge continued to participate in Wells Fargo's foreclosure action. He filed a motion for final judgment relying on the prior order granting his motion for summary judgment and alleging that Mary Dias's signatures on the note and mortgage held by Wells Fargo were forged. In support, he filed the affidavit of a forensic document examiner who concluded that the signatures on the mortgage were forged after reviewing Mary Dias's signatures on an unrelated mortgage and her answer to Wells Fargo's complaint. In the answer, Mary Dias alleged that the signatures on the note and mortgage were forged and that they were not authorized by her through a power of attorney. The circuit court granted Rutledge's motion for final judgment, relying on the earlier summary judgment in his favor and explaining that because Wells Fargo provided no responsive evidence to refute the assertions of Mary Dias and the forensic document examiner as to the authenticity of Mary Dias's signatures, there was no issue of material fact and summary judgment was appropriate. The court found that the Wells Fargo mortgage was a forgery, and therefore void, and discharged Wells Fargo's lis pendens against the property. This appeal followed.
Wells Fargo argues that the trial court erred when it determined that Wells Fargo was barred from pursuing its foreclosure claim in circuit court by laches and equitable estoppel and that summary judgment was improper because material issues of fact remained as to the authenticity of Mary Dias's signatures. We review an order granting summary judgment de novo. See Konsulian v. Busey Bank, N.A.,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kipps Colony II Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
...lien holder, was not required to litigate its interest in the Association's foreclosure action. See Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 148 So.3d 533, 534 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) ; Bevans, 138 So.3d at 1187 (“The Association ... could not name a superior lienholder like the Bank as a defendant i......
-
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Kipps Colony II Condo. Ass'n, Inc.
...lien holder, was not required to litigate its interest in the Association's foreclosure action. See Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 148 So. 3d 533, 534 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014); Bevans, 138 So. 3d at 1187 ("The Association . . . could not name a superior lienholder like the Bank as a defendan......
-
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge
...determining—without mention of standing—that a material issue of fact remained on the forgery defense. See Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 148 So.3d 533, 535 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).On remand, a bench trial was held. Rutledge submitted additional evidence in support of the claim that Ms. Dia......
-
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Dias
...Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 230 So. 3d 550, 550 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (Wells Fargo II), and before that in Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 148 So. 3d 533, 535 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (Wells Fargo I). Because the trial court failed to conduct a de novo trial on remand, we reverse and remand with ins......
-
Chapter 9-4 Post-Foreclosure
...protect even more junior mortgagees and lienors, in which case the same analysis would apply.[113] Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 148 So. 3d 533 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) ("Wells Fargo, as the superior lien holder, was not a proper party to Harbor Towers' foreclosure action. . . . Because it ......
-
Chapter 14-3 Rule 1.540 and Motions to Vacate Judgment
...Lamoise Grp., LLC v. Edgewater S. Beach Condo. Ass'n, 278 So. 3d 796 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).[111] See Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 148 So. 3d 533 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) ("Wells Fargo, as the superior lien holder, was not a proper party to Harbor Towers' foreclosure action. . . . Because it w......
-
Chapter 14-3 Rule 1.540 and Motions to Vacate Judgment
...Lamoise Grp., LLC v. Edgewater S. Beach Condo. Ass'n, 278 So. 3d 796 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).[148] See Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 148 So. 3d 533 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) ("Wells Fargo, as the superior lien holder, was not a proper party to Harbor Towers' foreclosure action. . . . Because it w......
-
Chapter 9-4 Post-Foreclosure
...protect even more junior mortgagees and lienors, in which case the same analysis would apply.[120] Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Rutledge, 148 So. 3d 533 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) ("Wells Fargo, as the superior lien holder, was not a proper party to Harbor Towers' foreclosure action. . . . Because it ......