§Why CasetextPricing

Coleman et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, National Association et al

MOTION for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support

20 Cited authorities

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 220,711 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

  2. Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio

    475 U.S. 574 (1986)   Cited 115,416 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

  3. Lone Star Fund v. Barclays Bank

    594 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 2010)   Cited 1,988 times
    Holding that a court considering a Rule 12(b) motion is "limited to the complaint, any documents attached to the complaint, and any documents attached to the motion to dismiss that are central to the claim and referenced by the complaint"

  4. Funk v. Stryker Corp.

    631 F.3d 777 (5th Cir. 2011)   Cited 894 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding court lacked jurisdiction to consider district court's denial of plaintiff's postjudgment motions because he did not file an amended, or separate, notice of appeal

  5. Bauer v. Texas

    341 F.3d 352 (5th Cir. 2003)   Cited 404 times
    Holding that the test for an "actual controversy" is nearly identical to the test for Article III standing

  6. Williams v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

    560 F. App'x 233 (5th Cir. 2014)   Cited 223 times
    Holding that extensions of time for payment did not amount to waiver of right to accelerate and foreclose based on DOT's non-waiver provisions

  7. Fricks v. Hancock

    45 S.W.3d 322 (Tex. App. 2001)   Cited 189 times
    Holding that a plaintiff "must prove and recover on the strength of his own title, not the weakness of his adversary's title."

  8. Wright v. Matthews

    26 S.W.3d 575 (Tex. App. 2000)   Cited 146 times
    Holding limitations-barred breach-of-contract claim was not counterclaim to action to quiet title under section 16.069

  9. U.S. Nat'l Bank Ass'n v. Johnson

    NO. 01-10-00837-CV (Tex. App. Dec. 30, 2011)   Cited 99 times
    Listing elements of quiet title cause of action to require that plaintiff have interest in property and title to property affected by defendant's claim and that defendant's claim, although facially valid, be invalid or unenforceable

  10. Bell v. Ott

    606 S.W.2d 942 (Tex. Civ. App. 1980)   Cited 101 times
    Holding that quiet title enables holder of feeblest equity to remove unlawful hindrance

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 336,292 times   161 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 2201 - Creation of remedy

    28 U.S.C. § 2201   Cited 25,071 times   62 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment

  13. Section 2601 - Congressional findings and purpose

    12 U.S.C. § 2601   Cited 3,497 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Providing purpose of RESPA is "to effect certain changes in the settlement process for residential real estate"

  14. Rule 902 - Evidence That Is Self-Authenticating

    Tex. R. Evid. 902   Cited 520 times

    The following items of evidence are self-authenticating; they require no extrinsic evidence of authenticity in order to be admitted: (1)Domestic Public Documents That Are Sealed and Signed. A document that bears: (A) a seal purporting to be that of the United States; any state, district, commonwealth, territory, or insular possession of the United States; the former Panama Canal Zone; the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; a political subdivision of any of these entities; or a department, agency

  15. Rule 736 - Expedited Order Proceeding

    Tex. R. Civ. P. 736   Cited 231 times

    736.1. Application (a)Where Filed. An application for an expedited order allowing the foreclosure of a lien listed in Rule 735 to proceed must be filed in a county where all or part of the real property encumbered by the loan agreement, contract, or lien sought to be foreclosed is located or in a probate court with jurisdiction over proceedings involving the property. (b)Style. An application must be styled "In re: Order for Foreclosure Concerning [state: property's mailing address] under Tex. R

  16. Rule 735 - Foreclosures Requiring a Court Order

    Tex. R. Civ. P. 735   Cited 65 times

    735.1. Liens Affected Rule 736 provides the procedure for obtaining a court order, when required, to allow foreclosure of a lien containing a power of sale in the security instrument, dedicatory instrument, or declaration creating the lien, including a lien securing any of the following: (a) a home equity loan, reverse mortgage, or home equity line of credit under article XVI, sections 50(a)(6), 50(k), and 50(t) of the Texas Constitution; (b) a tax lien transfer or property tax loan under sections

  17. Rule 309 - In Foreclosure Proceedings

    Tex. R. Civ. P. 309   Cited 50 times

    Judgments for the foreclosure of mortgages and other liens shall be that the plaintiff recover his debt, damages and costs, with a foreclosure of the plaintiff's lien on the property subject thereto, and, except in judgments against executors, administrators and guardians, that an order of sale shall issue to any sheriff or any constable within the State of Texas, directing him to seize and sell the same as under execution, in satisfaction of the judgment; and, if the property cannot be found, or