Opinion

Berry v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.

  • 57 So. 3d 142
  • 2010 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 243
  • 2010 WL 3377712
Court
Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama
Filed
Aug 27, 2010
Status
Published
Author
Pittman
On the bench
Bryan, Moore, Pittman, Thomas, Thompson, Writing
Cited by
18 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.8%

holding that, when an ejectment-action plaintiff bases his or her claim to legal title on a foreclosure deed, evidence tending to prove that the foreclosure sale and resulting foreclosure deed were invalid tends to prove an affirmative defense to the ejectment claim rather than tending to prove that the ejectment-action plaintiff lacked standing to bring the ejectment action

How later courts described this case

  • holding that, when an ejectment-action plaintiff bases his or her claim to legal title on a foreclosure deed, evidence tending to prove that the foreclosure sale and resulting foreclosure deed were invalid tends to prove an affirmative defense to the ejectment claim rather than tending to prove that the ejectment-action plaintiff lacked standing to bring the ejectment action
  • reviewing the matter at the summary judgment stage
  • sale price of 40% of the fair market value was inadequate

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

PITTMAN, Judge,

dissenting.

Viewing the record evidence in the light most favorable to the Berrys as the non-movants, the foreclosed property was worth between $84,800 and $86,500 but fetched $33,915 at the judicial sale, an amount that is between 39% and 40% of the property’s fair-market value. As a general rule, a naked claim of inadequacy of a winning bid will not legally support impeaching the validity of a judicial sale “unless the inadequacy is so glaring and grossly disproportionate to the real value of the property as at once to shock the understanding and conscience of an honest and just man and sufficient to create the presumption of fraud.” Martin v. Jones, 268 Ala. 286, 288 , 105 So.2d 860, 863 (1958); accord Hayden v. Smith, 216 Ala. 428, 430-31 , 113 So. 293, 295 (1927). “The decided cases indicate that in general a price less than one-third of the value of the land will be regarded as grossly inadequate.” Hayden, 216 Ala. at 431 , 113 So. at 295 . Because I cannot conclude, on these facts, that the price realized at the foreclosure sale was so low as to shock the conscience, I respectfully dissent from the reversal.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.