Pinti v. Emigrant Mortgage Co.
Pinti v. Emigrant Mortg. Co., 472 Mass. 226 (2015)
- Court
- Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
- Decided
- 2015-07-17
- Docket
- SJC-11742
- Cited by later opinions
- 96
What happened
Emigrant foreclosed on the home of Lesley Phillips and Linda Pinti. Its default notice did not track the mortgage's paragraph 22, which spells out what the notice must say.
What the court decided
The court held strict compliance with the mortgage's notice-of-default terms is required for a valid foreclosure sale, and the sale was void. The rule applies to the Pintis and prospectively.
In the court's words
“strict compliance with the notice of default provisions in paragraph 22 of the mortgage was required as a condition of a valid foreclosure sale”
Why it may matter to you
Most mortgages use the same standard paragraph 22 (in Texas deeds of trust too). This case shows a court voiding a sale because the notice did not follow it.
Why it might not apply
Massachusetts law; Texas courts generally ask whether a defect actually harmed you. Useful as persuasive reasoning, not a rule a Texas court must follow.
Most useful when
- Your default notice did not say what your mortgage (paragraph 22) requires
How to cite it
The full citation for the first time you mention it, a short form for later, and a sample sentence you can adapt.
Pinti v. Emigrant Mortg. Co., 472 Mass. 226 (2015)Short formPinti, 472 Mass. 226Draft — check it with free legal aid before you file or say it in court.
In Pinti v. Emigrant Mortg. Co., 472 Mass. 226 (2015), the court held that strict compliance with the mortgage's notice-of-default provisions is a condition of a valid foreclosure sale. Here, [say in one sentence what happened in your case]
Ask Techy about this case
Techy explains the case in plain words, why it may matter to you, its limits, and how to prepare. It only uses this case record.
Related cases
- Homeowner wonBinding
Ogden v. Gibraltar Savings Ass'n
640 S.W.2d 232 · Decided 1982
Mr. Ogden owned a house in Corpus Christi. After he fell behind, the savings association posted a trustee's sale and sold the house. He sued for wrongful foreclosure and lost in the lower courts.
Read the case - Homeowner lostBinding
University Savings Ass'n v. Springwoods Shopping Center
644 S.W.2d 705 · Decided 1982
A substitute trustee conducted the foreclosure sale, but his appointment had not been recorded. The owner sued for wrongful foreclosure.
Read the case - Partial winBinding
Shumway v. Horizon Credit Corp.
801 S.W.2d 890 · Decided 1991
The Shumways defaulted on a note and the holder demanded the entire balance. The holder argued the note's waiver language meant it did not have to warn them first.
Read the case