Zeller v. Home Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Atlanta
| Decision Date | 28 February 1996 |
| Docket Number | No. A95A2814,A95A2814 |
| Citation | 471 S.E.2d 1,220 Ga.App. 843 |
| Parties | ZELLER v. HOME FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION OF ATLANTA. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Farless & Newton, Floyd H. Farless, Rome, for appellant.
Morris, Schneider & Prior, Larry W. Johnson, Atlanta, for appellee.
Paulette Zeller sued Home Federal Savings & Loan Association of Atlanta ("Home Federal") alleging that Home Federal had wrongfully foreclosed its security deed on her property. Seeking to reverse summary judgment, Zeller enumerates four errors primarily challenging Home Federal's compliance with the statutory notice requirement of OCGA § 44-14-162.2(a). For the following reasons, we affirm.
Summary judgment is appropriate when the court, viewing all the facts and evidence and reasonable inferences from those facts in a light most favorable to the non-movant, concludes that the evidence does not create a triable issue as to each essential element of the case. Lau's Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491, 405 S.E.2d 474 (1991). Viewed in a light most favorable to Zeller, the record shows the following facts. On June 24, 1987, Zeller executed a promissory note in favor of Home Federal together with a security deed securing property located at 4969 Elizabeth Drive, Mableton, Georgia ("property address"). Thereafter, on several occasions during the life of the note, Zeller failed to make the requisite monthly payments and Home Federal sent written notice to Zeller at the property address. In August 1992, Zeller moved to 302 East Eighth Street, Rome, Georgia ("Rome address"). Home Federal continued to send notices of default to the property address based on the bank's policy of using the property address unless and until a borrower provided a signed letter giving written authorization from the borrower for the use of a different address.
Home Federal's policy was to send all of its correspondence via certified mail to the property address and to simultaneously send via non-certified mail the same correspondence to any mailing address a borrower provided. Thus, Home Federal sent a blizzard of paperwork to Zeller, both by certified mail and regular mail. Pursuant to its procedures, Home Federal continued to send certified mail to the property address and regular mail to the Rome address which Zeller had given. Home Federal's correspondence included default letters sent to Zeller in May, July, August, October, November and December 1992 and more breach letters in January, February, March, May, June, and July 1993. In September 1993, Home Federal sent Zeller a foreclosure and acceleration letter via certified mail.
At some point, Zeller called Home Federal and spoke with a loan counselor and informed her that she had moved to Rome. The representative made a written notation on Zeller's file. Some of Zeller's payment checks had her Rome address. However, the record fails to show that Zeller ever provided written authorization to Home Federal to use her Rome address or any other address. The loan counselor testified that Zeller never gave her notice that she should correspond with her at the Rome address.
On December 7, 1993, Home Federal conducted a foreclosure sale of the property. On April 5, 1994, following advertising and notice, a second foreclosure sale was conducted and the highest bidder was again Home Federal. It is undisputed that prior to the sale, Home Federal sent written notice pursuant to OCGA § 44-14-162.2 by certified mail to the property address.
Finding...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Southern Co. v. Hamburg, A95A2745
... ... Lyman Dillon, David M. Monde, Atlanta, for appellants ... Arnall, ... American Assn., etc., 214 Ga.App. 635, 638(3), 448 S.E.2d 741; ... Patterson Funeral Home v. Head, 215 Ga.App. 578, 585(5), 451 S.E.2d 812 ... ...
-
McCallum v. Bank of Am., N.A. (In re McCallum)
...invalid, if a debtor has not designated a different notice address in writing. See § 44-14-162.2(a); Zeller v. Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Atlanta, 471 S.E.2d 1, 2-3 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996) (holding that written notice, rather than a telephone call or other means, is necessary to modify a bo......
-
Rubin v. Cello Corp.
...issue as to each essential element of the case. Lau's Corp. v. Haskins, 261 Ga. 491, 405 S.E.2d 474 (1991)." Zeller v. Home Fed. Savings &c., 220 Ga.App. 843, 471 S.E.2d 1 (1996). 1. The evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to Rubin establishes that Rubin slipped and fell at th......
-
Stewart v. Johnson
...the evidence does not create a triable issue as to each essential element of the case." (Citation omitted.) Zeller v. Home Fed. S & L Assn. &c., 220 Ga.App. 843, 471 S.E.2d 1 (1996). It is well established that a plaintiff seeking to enforce a promissory note establishes a prima facie case ......
-
Real Property - T. Daniel Brannan and William J. Sheppard
...(1982). 127. 226 Ga. App. at 96, 485 S.E.2d at 585. 128. Id. at 94, 485 S.E.2d at 584. 129. Id. at 97, 485 S.E.2d at 586. 130. 220 Ga. App. 843, 471 S.E.2d 1 (1996). 131. T. Daniel Brannan et al., Real Property, 48 MERCER L. REV. 455, 480-81 (1996). 132. Barnett argued that "the similarity ......
-
Real Property - T. Daniel Brannan, Stephen M. Lamastra, and William J. Sheppard
...Inc. v. Security Nat'l Bank, 220 Ga. App. 359, 469 S.E.2d 454 (1996); Zeller v. Home Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n, 220 Ga. App 843, 471 S.E.2d 1 (1996). 184. 220 Ga. App. 359, 469 S.E.2d 454 (1996). 185. Id. at 359, 469 S.E.2d at 454. 186. Id. 187. Id. at 359-60, 469 S.E.2d at 456. 188. Id.......
-
Real Property - Linda S. Finley
...bulk sales methodology that 163. Id. at 689, 691 S.E.2d at 599 (alterations in original) (quoting Zeller v. Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 220 Ga. App. 843, 845, 471 S.E.2d 1, 2 (1996)). 164. 302 Ga. App. 591, 692 S.E.2d 42 (2010). 165. See generally O.C.G.A. § 44-14-161(b) (2002) ("The court......