From our private database of 37,500+ case briefs...
Holm v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc.
Missouri Supreme Court
514 S.W.3d 590 (2017)
David and Crystal Holm (collectively, Holm) (plaintiffs) purchased a property secured by a promissory note held by Federal National Mortgage Company (Freddie Mac) (defendant). Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Incorporated (Wells Fargo) (defendant) serviced the note on behalf of Freddie Mac. Holm was behind on payments to Wells Fargo but had a payment plan in place. During a storm, Holm’s property suffered damage. Wells Fargo accelerated Holm’s loan because a Wells Fargo agent mistakenly believed that Holm was abandoning their property. Subsequently, Wells Fargo’s attorneys from Kozeny and McCubbin, LC (Kozeny) informed Holm that their note had been accelerated and that they had to pay about $7,000 to reinstate the note. Holm disputed the acceleration and stated they were on a payment plan. Kozeny replied that Holm was required to pay the entire loan amount, fees, and costs to reinstate the note. Holm again disputed the amount owed. Regardless, Kozeny scheduled a foreclosure sale. Holm made repeated attempts to resolve the dispute over the amount owed. Eventually, Holm reached an agreement with a Wells Fargo representative on the eve of the sale. Holm agreed to pay about $10,000 to reinstate the note in order to postpone the sale. The representative told Holm to arrange for payment with Kozeny and that they did not have to deliver payment before the sale. Holm contacted Kozeny the following morning and confirmed the arrangements. Kozeny told Holm the sale would be postponed. However, Freddie Mac had purchased the house at the foreclosure sale. Kozeny returned the cashier’s check to Holm because it had not been received before the sale. Later, Wells Fargo offered Holm another reinstatement amount, but when Holm sent a cashier’s check, Wells Fargo refused to reinstate the loan. Holm sued Wells Fargo and Freddie Mac for money damages for wrongful foreclosure. The trial court entered judgment in favor of Holm, awarding money damages including about $3 million in punitive damages against Wells Fargo. Wells Fargo appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Russel, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 631,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 631,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 37,500 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.