Media Center

IDAHO SUPREME COURT WIN FOR PARSONS BEHLE & LATIMER ATTORNEYS JON STENQUIST AND ROB COUCH
September 11, 2019


Idaho Supreme Court Win for Parsons Behle & Latimer Attorneys

Ruling clarifies Idaho foreclosure laws

On Aug. 29, Parsons Behle & Latimer (Parsons) attorneys Jon A. Stenquist and Robert J. Couch received a decision from the Idaho Supreme Court in favor of clients U. S. Bank and Select Portfolio Services (SPS ). The decision provides clarification against a common argument raised in contested foreclosure matters in Idaho and will likely be cited by lenders who previously lacked such strong precedent.  

The Supreme Court opinion was issued in response to an appeal of a $1.44 million residential property foreclosure in Ketchum, Idaho. Prior to the sale, the borrower sought to delay the foreclosure process utilizing several complex regulatory machinations contained in Dodd-Frank, RESPA (Regulation X) and the Truth in Lending Act as well as allegations of breach of fiduciary duty and technical deficiencies in the foreclosure process.

Couch says, “In our briefing and at oral argument, we addressed nearly a dozen different issues raised by the borrower on appeal. In its decision, the Supreme Court repeatedly referenced our arguments and each time concluded that ‘Lenders are correct.’ We are happy to see our interpretation of state and federal law confirmed by the Supreme Court.”

The Idaho Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s findings that the lender complied with federal law and further resolved the following two Idaho issues:   

First, the court clarified that a lender need not record the appointment of a successor trustee prior to starting the non-judicial foreclosure process.

Second, the court’s opinion underscored that even significant irregularities in the announcement of a postponement of a foreclosure sale are insufficient to delay the sale, so long as the borrower has notice of postponement and is not harmed by the irregularity. This decision strengthens the expectation of “No Harm, No Foul.”

Jon Stenquist, lead Parsons attorney on the matter stated, “This opinion is another example of the Supreme Court’s recognition that a deal is a deal, and without a proper showing of actual prejudice, alleged technicalities will not win the day. We are pleased to provide a victory for our clients in this complex matter and to obtain further clarity in the complex world of banking regulation and contested foreclosure matters.”

Media contact:
Dana Robinson
Marketing and Communications Manager
Parsons Behle & Latimer
Phone: 801.536.6647 Mobile: 801.541.4625
drobinson@parsonsbehle.com