ILNews

Court cites 1827 case to affirm mortgage trumps land contract

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A bank that issued a mortgage to a person selling a property on a land contract has the right to foreclose on the loan, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled, citing caselaw nearly 200 years old.

Judge John Baker cited the “first in time is first in right” doctrine and Chief Justice John Marshall’s ruling in Rankin v. Scott, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat) 177, 179 (1827) to determine that the bank had the senior claim on a property in Cumberland even though a land contract between the owner and buyer had been executed years earlier. The contract wasn’t recorded until after the mortgage was recorded.

In Walter E. Lunsford v. Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas as Trustee 30A01-1302-MF-63, the appeals panel affirms the summary judgment grant to the bank by Hancock Superior Judge Richard D. Culver.

Lunsford appealed pro se, arguing among other things that Deutsche Bank failed to produce loan documents, that it had no right to acquire a loan as a mortgage-backed security, that it failed to join indispensable parties, that it had no standing to bring the foreclosure action, and that it did not exist. Lunsford also argued on appeal that the bank refused payment from him.

Baker wrote that several of the arguments were waived because they weren’t raised at the trial court, and that the trial court gave Lunsford opportunities to pay the mortgage, but no tender was made.

“The mortgage was recorded on August 25, 2005, by the Recorder of Hancock County,” Baker wrote in an opinion joined by judges Ezra Friedlander and Nancy Vaidik. “Lunsford’s Land Contract was recorded on March 8, 2006, which was over six months after the mortgage was recorded and perfected. … Consequently, the mortgage is senior in priority to Lunsford’s Land Contract.

“Moreover, because Lunsford was made a party to Deutsche Bank’s foreclosure action and given the opportunity to assert his junior interest in the Real Estate, the judgment is conclusive on him,” the panel concluded in affirming the trial court.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
2015 Distinguished Barrister &
Up and Coming Lawyer Reception

Tuesday, May 5, 2015 • 4:30 - 7:00 pm
Learn More


ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. OK, now do something about this preverted anacronism

  2. William Hartley prosecutor of Wabash county constantly violates people rights. Withholds statement's, is bias towards certain people. His actions have ruined lives and families. In this county you question him or go out of town for a lawyer,he finds a way to make things worse for you. Unfair,biased and crooked.

  3. why is the State trying to play GOD? Automatic sealing of a record is immoral. People should have the right to decide how to handle a record. the state is playing GOD. I have searched for decades, then you want me to pay someone a huge price to contact my son. THIS is extortion and gestapo control. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW. OPEN THE RECORDS NOW.

  4. I haven't made some of the best choices in the last two years I have been to marion county jail 1 and two on three different occasions each time of release dates I've spent 48 to 72 hours after date of release losing a job being denied my freedom after ordered please help

  5. Out here in Kansas, where I now work as a government attorney, we are nearing the end of a process that could have relevance in this matter: "Senate Bill 45 would allow any adult otherwise able to possess a handgun under state and federal laws to carry that gun concealed as a matter of course without a permit. This move, commonly called constitutional carry, would elevate the state to the same club that Vermont, Arizona, Alaska and Wyoming have joined in the past generation." More reading here: http://www.guns.com/2015/03/18/kansas-house-panel-goes-all-in-on-constitutional-carry-measure/ Time to man up, Hoosiers. (And I do not mean that in a sexist way.)

ADVERTISEMENT