California Decision for Borrower Post Sale in Eviction Proceeding

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not legal advice. Always consult with a licensed attorney about your specific situation.

---

Big Win in San Diego

Hat tip to attorney Stephen Lopez, Esq. for securing a significant ruling in San Diego. This case adds to a growing body of decisions where judges take the time to carefully examine both the law and the facts, rather than rubber-stamping foreclosures.

At issue was whether a plaintiff in an unlawful detainer action could be granted summary judgment solely because the foreclosure sale had been recorded.

The court said no: recording is not enough if the sale itself was void.

---

Why Recording Isn’t Everything

The judge recognized an essential principle:

• If the sale is void—because it was conducted by or in favor of a party with no legal authority—then the sale cannot stand, regardless of what’s been recorded.

Put differently, allowing any entity to record a sale and then claim ownership would produce the absurd result of letting completely disinterested strangers sell homes and seize possession.

---

What This Means for Homeowners

This ruling underscores that even after a foreclosure has gone through, homeowners may still have valid defenses if the party conducting the sale lacked authority.

It also highlights why preparation and precision matter:

• You cannot rely on assumptions or hope the court will fill in the blanks for you.

• You must clearly demonstrate the facts and frame your arguments in sound legal reasoning.

Many of these cases eventually settle—often under confidentiality agreements—because foreclosure mills don’t want the legal reasoning on record. But the lesson is clear: well-prepared cases based on real facts can succeed.

---

Key Quotes From the Decision

• “To establish that he is a proper plaintiff, one who has purchased property at a trustee’s sale and seeks to evict the occupant in possession must show that he acquired the property at a regularly conducted sale and thereafter ‘duly perfected’ his title.”

• “The term ‘duly’ implies that all of those elements necessary to a valid sale exist, else there would not be a sale at all.”

• “Only the ‘true owner’ or ‘beneficial holder’ of a Deed of Trust can bring to completion a nonjudicial foreclosure under California law.”

• “If a purported assignment necessary to the chain by which the foreclosing entity claims that power is absolutely void… the foreclosing entity has acted without legal authority… and such an unauthorized sale constitutes a wrongful foreclosure.”

• “It would be an odd result indeed were a court to conclude a homeowner had no recourse where anyone, even a stranger to the debt, had declared a default and ordered a trustee’s sale.”

---

Why It Matters

This case shows that standing and ownership of the debt remain central in foreclosure litigation. If the plaintiff cannot prove ownership of the debt, it cannot enforce the deed of trust or credit bid.

That is not theory—it is established law. And courts are increasingly willing to apply it when properly presented.

---

Get Support

Understanding your case is the key to victory.

Call us today at 844.583.5339
Submit your case statement online for a complimentary recommendation.
Visit LivingLies.me for resources and case insights.

We can help with:

• Foreclosure defense strategy

• Drafting discovery requests

• Building your defense narrative

• Case analysis and expert witness support

Posted in Eviction, evidence, legal standing |