From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...
Lacy-McKinney v. Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp.
Indiana Court of Appeals
937 N.E.2d 853 (2010)
Florence R. Lacy-McKinney (plaintiff) financed the purchase of a home with a mortgage that was insured by the Federal Housing Authority, an office within the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The mortgage was eventually transferred to Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp. (Taylor) (defendant). Lacy-McKinney fell behind on her mortgage payments, and Taylor brought a mortgage-foreclosure action against Lacy-McKinney. Prior to initiating the action, Taylor did not attempt to schedule a face-to-face meeting with Lacy-McKinney to discuss her missed payments or attempt to arrange a payment plan. Taylor moved for summary judgment on its foreclosure action, and Lacy-McKinney raised affirmative defenses to the foreclosure. Lacy-McKinney argued that Taylor had failed to comply with HUD regulations regarding foreclosure actions on HUD-insured mortgages. HUD regulations specifically required mortgagees to have or attempt to schedule a face-to-face meeting with borrowers who had fallen behind on payments to discuss repayment plans or other loss-mitigation procedures prior to initiating a foreclosure action. HUD regulations also required mortgagees to accept partial mortgage payments. Taylor argued that it did not have to schedule a face-to-face meeting with Lacy-McKinney because it did not have an office within 200 miles of her home, and that she did not attempt to make partial payments—both facts that Lacy-McKinney disputed. The trial court granted summary judgment for Taylor. Lacy-McKinney appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Kirsch, 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 618,000 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 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 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.