Deutsche Bank National Trust Co v Snick (IL)

Summary: A challenge to a plaintiff’s standing in a mortgage foreclosure case may not be raised at the confirmation of sale hearing.

Foreclosure; Mortgages

Deutsche Bank National Trust Co v Snick, 2011 Ill App (3d) 100, 436, 957 NE2d 1273, 354 Ill Dec 480 (3d D, 2011).

Facts: Deutsche Bank filed a complaint to foreclose a $750,000 mortgage against Kari Snick on March 1, 2007. Snick had an attorney make a general appearance on her behalf but did not answer the complaint, and therefore default judgment was entered. After the default judgment, Snick made a series of emergency motions to stay the sale of the subject property. On December 16, 2009, her final motion was denied and the property was sold at a sheriff's sale.

Deutsche Bank made a motion for an order to approve the sale and Snick filed a response alleging that the bank lacked standing. The trial court denied Snick's motion to vacate the order approving the sale, holding that the challenge to standing was not timely raised. Snick appealed.

Holding: Affirmed. The Illinois Appellate Court held that the trial court did not err in denying Snick's motion because "Snick did not give the trial court any basis to refuse confirmation of the sale." Under the Illinois Mortgage Foreclosure Law a trial court can only refuse confirmation of a judicial sale if one or more of the following grounds are raised: appropriate notice was not given, the terms of the sale were unconscionable, the sale was conducted fraudulently or justice was otherwise not done.

Snick did not raise any of these four grounds as a reason why the sale should be vacated. She argued that the bank lacked standing, but this challenge was brought for the first time in the motion to vacate the sale. Snick had numerous other opportunities to raise such a challenge but failed to do so. A challenge to standing will be waived if not raised in a timely fashion and the Court held that raising it for the first time after the judicial sale, three years after the judgment of foreclosure, was not timely and therefore had been waived.

Opinion Year: 
By: ATG Underwriting Department | Posted on: Sun, 04/01/2012 - 9:47pm