Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION Trustee Under Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dates as of September 1, 2005, Wachovia Mortgage Loan Trust Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2005-WMCI, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. John JENKINS, Candace Jenkins, and/or All Unknown Occupants, Defendants and Appellants.
¶1 Pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c), Montana Supreme Court Internal Operating Rules, this case is decided by memorandum opinion and shall not be cited and does not serve as precedent. Its case title, cause number, and disposition shall be included in this Court's quarterly list of noncitable cases published in the Pacific Reporter and Montana Reports.
¶2 John and Candace Jenkins appeal the Order of the Fourth Judicial District Court, Missoula County, granting U.S. Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment on an unlawful detainer action. We affirm.
¶3 The facts of this matter are detailed in this Court's two previous opinions regarding the Jenkins foreclosure.1 Despite our rulings in favor of U.S. Bank, the Jenkins refuse to vacate their foreclosed property. Our previous opinions clearly established that U.S. Bank properly foreclosed and owns the property and, therefore, U.S. Bank is entitled to judgment because the Jenkins are unlawfully detaining the property by refusing to vacate. See § 70-27-108, MCA; see also M. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(3); Estate of Donald v. Kalispell Reg'l Med. Ctr., 2011 MT 166, ¶ 16, 361 Mont. 179, 258 P.3d 395 (citation omitted) (“Summary judgment is appropriate only when there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”). Moreover, res judicata bars the Jenkins's additional arguments seeking to attack the underlying foreclosure. See Baltrusch v. Baltrusch, 2006 MT 51, ¶¶ 15-16, 331 Mont. 281, 130 P.3d 1267 (citations omitted). The District Court did not err by granting U.S. Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment. See M. R. Civ. P. 56(c)(3); Estate of Donald, ¶ 16.
¶4 We have determined to decide this case pursuant to Section I, Paragraph 3(c) of our Internal Operating Rules, which provides for memorandum opinions. In the opinion of the Court, the case presents a question controlled by settled law or by the clear application of applicable standards of review. We affirm.
FOOTNOTES
1. Jenkins v. U.S. Bank, et al., No. DA 16-0732, 2017 MT 194N, ¶¶ 3-4, 2017 Mont. LEXIS 484, 2017 WL 3393581; Jenkins v. U.S. Bank, et al., No. DA 13-0838, 2014 MT 229N, ¶¶ 3-9, 2014 Mont. LEXIS 482, 2014 WL 4090169.
Justice James Jeremiah Shea delivered the Opinion of the Court.
We concur: LAURIE McKINNON, J. DIRK M. SANDEFUR, J. BETH BAKER, J. JIM RICE, J.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: DA 18-0312
Decided: January 22, 2019
Court: Supreme Court of Montana.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)