Another day, another foreclosure defense trial victory for Hicks | Knight, and another happy client.
On December 12, 2014, Hicks | Knight represented a foreclosure defense client in a foreclosure defense trial in Hillsborough County.
Just prior to trial, we offered for the bank to voluntarily dismiss the case because, based on the documents, the foreclosing bank was simply going to be unable to prove its standing to foreclose in this 2008 case. Not surprisingly, the bank simply rejected our offer and elected to “move forward” despite the clear insufficiency of its documents.
So we start trial and it went all downhill for the bank from there. Of the first six exhibits the bank tried to admit into evidence, Adam J. Knight convinced the trial court to exclude four of them. In fact, the only two exhibits admitted into evidence were the promissory note and mortgage, which were admitted by consent from the defendant.
After the bank’s robo-witness was unable to establish the foundation required to admit the bank’s exhibits, Plaintiff’s counsel requested a recess from the court to discuss the “situation” with the bank witness and his contacts.
After about 15 minutes outside, Plaintiff returns and announces that Plaintiff will voluntarily dismiss its case. In light of the new decision in Deutsche Bank Trust Company of the Americas v. Beauvais, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D1c, ___ So.3d ___ (Fla. 3rd DCA Dec. 17, 2014) (holding the statute of limitations is a bar to a subsequent foreclosure where the first foreclosure was dismissed without prejudice), this may likely be a situation where the statute of limitations may indefinitely bar the bank from foreclosing in the future.
If you have a foreclosure case and need assistance, please contact us for more information about how we can help you.