My firm recently had the opportunity to represent a homeowner in obtaining one of the biggest and most significant appellate wins in Texas regarding robo-signatures.  The case, Vazquez v. Deutsche, filed in Houston, and appealed to the 1st Court of Appeals is not only big for my client, its huge for Texas homeowners.  The 1st Court of Appeals, in what appears to be the first of its kind in Texas state court, held that homeowners DO have the right to challenge fraudulent assignments by banks but the key to withstanding a Motion for Summary Judgment (getting kicked out of court without a chance to present one’s case) is the reason for challenging the assignment.  If the homeowner brings an argument that falls under the void category, then the homeowner has the right to proceed with their case.  If the homeowner files a claim that falls under the voidable category, then the homeowner will be tossed out of court and will probably not receive another chance.  Take note that under both scenarios, the bank probably did something wrong but under only 1 of the 2 can the homeowner be the one to complain!

I will be writing a more in depth article about this distinction but it’s important to “crawl before we walk, and walk before we run” so that we avoid missing the little details that can be the difference between the life and death of a claim.  I have attached another case in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals where the Court held that the homeowners HAD standing but made the voidable argument.  In other words, being “close” is not good enough.  The argument has to be perfect or its over!