Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Melahn — 1/27/2014

The defendant…appeals from the trial court’s judgment denying his motion to open the strict foreclosure action that was instituted against him by the plaintiff…. We conclude that the court had the jurisdiction and authority to open, and that it should have opened, the judgment of strict foreclosure after the running of the law day in order to effectuate the clear terms of its judgment, with which the plaintiff encumbrancer had failed to comply and then falsely certified that it had complied. Accordingly, given the unusual specific facts and circumstances of this case, including the omissions and falsification by the plaintiff constituting its noncompliance with the strict foreclosure judgment of the court, we reverse the judgment of the trial court denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss the strict foreclosure action.

AC34726

Read Opinion