Ramsey County District Court File No. 62-HG-CV-11-1034
Amanda M. Govze, Shapiro & Zielke, LLP, Burnsville, Minnesota (for respondent)
George L. Tyus, IV, St. Paul, Minnesota (pro se appellant)
Considered and decided by Rodenberg, Presiding Judge; Halbrooks, Judge; and Larkin, Judge.
Appellant challenges the district court's award of default judgment for respondent in an eviction proceeding, arguing that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, respondent lacked standing to bring the eviction action, and appellant's due-process rights were violated. We affirm.
This appeal stems from an eviction action that followed the foreclosure on appellant George L. Tyus IV's real property. On September 23, 2010, respondent OWB REO LLC (the bank) purchased Tyus's property at a sheriff's sale. Because Tyus and his wife remained in possession of the property after expiration of the six-month statutory-redemption period, the bank commenced an eviction action in April 2011.
Tyus sued the bank and its eviction counsel in a separate action, alleging defects in the underlying foreclosure. In his suit, Tyus sought and received a stay of the eviction action. The bank and its counsel removed the Tyus case to federal court, the federal district court dismissed the case with prejudice, and the eviction action-no longer stayed based on the Tyus lawsuit-was reopened in February 2012.
Tyus filed for federal bankruptcy protection three times between February and July 2012. The first case was dismissed on February 27, and the second case was dismissed on April 3. Tyus filed for bankruptcy a third time on June 19, at which point the bank obtained an order from the bankruptcy court confirming that no automatic stay was in effect. Tyus then moved the bankruptcy court to set aside that order.
The district court held a hearing in the eviction proceeding, and Tyus failed to appear. The district court granted the bank a default eviction judgment and awarded the bank immediate possession of the property under a writ of recovery of premises. This appeal follows.
The decision to grant or deny a motion for default judgment lies within the discretion of the district court, and an appellate court will not reverse absent an abuse of that discretion. Black v. Rimmer, 700 N.W.2d 521, 525 ...