IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 2 February 2016

Similar documents
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 7 April 2015

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 21 October 2014

WHEN IS A FORECLOSURE SALE FINAL IN NORTH CAROLINA?

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 17 February Appeal by respondents from order entered 8 August 2013 by

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 September Appeal by respondent from order entered 19 September 2013

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 February 2013

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 August Mecklenburg County. and

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 July Appeal by plaintiff from orders entered 15 April 2010 and 2

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 August Appeal by Respondent from order entered 6 June 2013 by

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 31 December Appeal by respondent from order entered 14 April 2014 by

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 5 July 2016

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 January 2011

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 March Appeal by Defendant from order entered 29 April 2013 by

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 6 May Appeal by Defendant from order entered 28 June 2013 by

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 22, 2012 Session

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 15 May 2012

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 21 November 2017

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CARBON COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

NO. COA13-43 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 November 2013

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 7 August v. Mecklenburg County No. 09 CVD JACQUELINE MOSS, Defendant

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 15 July Appeal by defendants from order entered 17 September 2013

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 August Appeal by defendant from order entered 15 July 2010 by

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:14-CV-165-FDW ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 17 March 2015

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE March 23, 2017 Session

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 January Appeal by defendant from order entered 6 October 2009 by Judge

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED OF FLORIDA

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 17 September v. New Hanover County Nos. 11 CVM 1575 JOHN MUNN, 11 CVM 1576 Defendant.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D

Illinois Official Reports

NC General Statutes - Chapter 45 Article 2 1

ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS COUNTY OF PENDER 13 DHR 09422

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON NOVEMBER 18, 2010 Session

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

FIFTH DISTRICT. PRESIDING JUSTICE STEWART delivered the opinion of the court:

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 2 October 2012

NO. COA Filed: 15 January Civil Procedure--Rule 60(b)(1) motion--excusable neglect--notice of hearing

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 06a0336n.06 Filed: May 11, No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

ZB, N.A., a National Banking Association, Plaintiff/Appellee,

NC General Statutes - Chapter 1 Article 29B 1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs April 3, 2017

Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County Case No. C-02-CV UNREPORTED

Illinois Official Reports

No September Term, 2015 EDIDIONG UBOM, ET AL. Nazarian, Kehoe, Kenney, James A., III (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., a national banking association, Plaintiff/Appellant,

John Cottle and Jay Roberts of Becker & Poliakoff, P.A., Fort Walton Beach, for Appellant.

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

Court of Appeals. Slip Opinion

IC Chapter 7. Foreclosure ) Redemption, Sale, Right to Retain Possession

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D

S10F1810. TREMBLE v. TREMBLE. S10F1811. TREMBLE v. TREMBLE. Debra Tremble ( Wife ) and Lamar Tremble ( Husband ) were married

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 276PA15. Filed 21 December 2016

Present: Carrico, C.J., Hassell, Keenan, Koontz, Kinser, and Lemons, JJ., and Compton, S.J.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO. Docket No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CLERMONT COUNTY, OHIO

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D CORRECTED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Submitted:September 23, 2013 Decided: December 8, 2014)

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 17 May 2011

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

DAVID M. ELLIOTT and ELLIOTT AIR, INC., Plaintiffs, v. LISA L. ELLIOTT, DIANE K. NICHOLS, KAREN POWERS, and DENNIS L. MORAN, Defendants.

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO. v. NO. 34,727

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. COA Filed: 4 October 2016

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

The 2008 Florida Statutes

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI I. In the Matter of the

1. Recording a notice in the office of the recorder of each county where the trust property is situated.

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 2 April 2013

UNREPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2014 PAULETTE WILLIAMS. CARRIE M. WARD, et al. SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEES

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 7 June Appeal by plaintiff from order entered on or about 30

2015 IL App (1st) U. No IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. CAAP IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff, : Case No. 12CV557. v. : Judge Berens

United States Bankruptcy Court. Northern District of California ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Bayview Loan Servicing v. Simmons, 275 Va. 114, 654 S.E.2d 898 (2008) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VIRGINIA. BAYVIEW LOAN SERVICING, LLC v.

Submitted January 30, 2018 Decided. Before Judges Yannotti and Leone.

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND. No September Term, 2010 ANNE-THERESE BECHAMPS, SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEE

SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA En Banc

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 5 November On writ of certiorari to review order entered 29 May 2012

DISTRICT COURT DIVISION

Civil Procedure Case Summaries July October 2009

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS

(Reprinted with amendments adopted on May 17, 2017) SECOND REPRINT S.B. 33. Referred to Committee on Judiciary

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P

Transcription:

An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3) of the North Carolina Rules of Appellate Procedure. IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF NORTH CAROLINA No. COA15-639 Filed: 2 February 2016 Ashe County, No. 12 SP 18 IN THE MATTER OF THE FORECLOSURE OF A DEED OF TRUST EXECUTED BY WILLIAM GERALD PRICE in the original amount of $190,000.00 dated December 12, 2002, recorded in Book 286, Page 113, Ashe County Registry. SUBSTITUTE TRUSTEE SERVICES, INC., Substitute Trustee. Appeal by respondent from order entered 9 March 2015 by Judge David L. Hall in Ashe County Superior Court. Heard in the Court of Appeals 18 November 2015. William Gerald Price, pro se, respondent-appellant. HUTCHENS LAW FIRM, by Natasha M. Barone, for petitioner-appellee. ELMORE, Judge. William Gerald Price (respondent) appeals from an order denying his motion to vacate and imposing a gatekeeping injunction against him. We dismiss the appeal as moot. I. Background

On 12 December 2002, respondent executed a Promissory Note in the principal amount of $190,000.00, payable to SunTrust Mortgage, Inc. (SunTrust). The Note was secured by a Deed of Trust pledging certain real property located at 300 Bronze Turkey Lane in Zionville, North Carolina (Subject Property), as security for the repayment of the Note. The Deed of Trust granted SunTrust the power to foreclose upon the Subject Property through a power of sale in the event of default. After the period ending 1 May 2010, respondent failed to make timely payments and defaulted on his obligations under the Note. On 21 November 2011, SunTrust appointed Substitute Trustee Services, Inc. (STS) as substitute trustee of the Deed of Trust. STS initiated foreclosure proceedings against respondent on 6 February 2012, by filing the Notice of Hearing Prior to Foreclosure of Deed of Trust. On 10 May 2012, the Clerk of Superior Court of Ashe County entered an order allowing foreclosure (First Order Allowing Foreclosure), finding that SunTrust was the holder of the Note, the Note evidenced a valid debt owed by respondent, the Note was in default and gave SunTrust the right to foreclose under a power of sale, proper notice had been given, and respondent showed no valid legal reason why foreclosure should not commence. On 14 May 2012, respondent appealed the First Order Allowing Foreclosure pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 45-21.16(d). The matter was heard on 16 August 2012, before the Honorable R. Stuart Albright in Ashe County Superior Court. After - 2 -

reviewing the evidence and hearing testimony of the parties, the court entered an order allowing foreclosure (Second Order Allowing Foreclosure). Based on its findings, the court concluded that each element of N.C. Gen. Stat. 45-21.16 had been satisfied, dismissed respondent s appeal, and ordered the foreclosure to proceed. On 13 September 2012, respondent appealed the Second Order Allowing Foreclosure entered by the Superior Court. The matter was heard on 6 January 2014, before the Honorable Andrew R. Hassell in Wilkes County Superior Court. Upon SunTrust s motion, the court entered an order dismissing the appeal based on respondent s failure to timely file the record on appeal and properly docket the matter. On 11 February 2014, SunTrust purchased the Subject Property at a foreclosure sale conducted pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. 45-21.16, et seq. No upset bids were filed, and the sale was confirmed on 21 February 2014. SunTrust subsequently assigned its bid to Federal National Mortgage Association (petitioner). STS recorded the Trustee s Deed on 5 March 2014, conveying the Subject Property to petitioner, in Book 448 at Page 1933 of the Ashe County Register of Deeds. On 30 December 2014, after a series of subsequent motions and appeals, respondent filed a motion to vacate in Ashe County Superior Court, seeking to void all orders and judgments entered in this foreclosure proceeding. Petitioner opposed - 3 -

the motion and requested that the court impose a gatekeeping order and sanctions against respondent. On 9 March 2015, the Honorable David L. Hall entered an order denying respondent s motion to vacate and imposing a gatekeeping order against him. The court concluded, inter alia, that [n]o good cause exists to set aside any of the orders entered in this action, and [d]espite many orders denying [respondent s] frivolous motions, [respondent] continues to file motions seeking to undue the foreclosure; however the rights of the parties are now fixed. Respondent appeals from the order. II. Discussion The issues raised by respondent in his motion to vacate and, consequently, this appeal, are moot because the parties rights to the Subject Property are fixed. [T]he rights of the parties to a foreclosure sale become fixed upon either the expiration of the period for filing an upset bid, the provision of injunctive relief precluding the consummation of the foreclosure sale, or the occurrence of some similar event. Goad v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, 208 N.C. App. 259, 263, 704 S.E.2d 1, 4 (2010); see also N.C. Gen. Stat. 45-21.29A (2013) ( If an upset bid is not filed following a sale, resale, or prior upset bid within the period specified in this Article, the rights of the parties to the sale or resale become fixed. ). Thereafter, unless the sale was stayed, any attempt to disturb the foreclosure sale is moot. In re Foreclosure of Cornblum, 220 N.C. App. 100, 106, 727 S.E.2d 338, 342 (2012); see also In re Foreclosure of Hackley, - 4 -

212 N.C. App. 596, 605 06, 713 S.E.2d 119, 125 (2011) (dismissing appeal as moot where the property was sold, the trustee s deed was recorded, and the sale was not stayed). In the present case, the foreclosure sale was completed and the Subject Property was sold to SunTrust. No upset bids were filed within ten days of the sale, and respondent failed to obtain a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, or other stay of the proceeding. The Trustee s Deed was subsequently recorded on 5 March 2014. Therefore, the rights of the parties in this action have been fixed, and respondent s challenge to the foreclosure is moot. III. Conclusion The rights of the parties to the Subject Property have been fixed. We dismiss the appeal as moot. DISMISSED. Judges CALABRIA and ZACHARY concur. Report per Rule 30(e). - 5 -