GMAT Legal Title Trust 2014-1, U.S. Bank, N.A. as Legal Title Trustee v. Vito Catale

GMAT Legal Title Trust 2014-1, U.S. Bank, N.A. as Legal Title Trustee v. Vito Catale

Appellate Court Upholds Incorporating Summary Judgment Affidavits into PJR Application; Due Process Challenge to Lack of Post-Attachment Hearing Dismissed as Moot After Foreclosure Judgment

UKS Attorney Paul Gilmore successfully defended an appeal from a prejudgment remedy order obtained on exigent circumstances (probable cause that the defendant was about to secrete or remove valuable assets from the state to avoid their attachment by the plaintiff).  Attorney Gilmore used the order to obtain an attachment lien against those valuable assets and the defendant appealed, challenging that the trial court did not have jurisdiction over the PJR Application and lacked statutory authority to issue the PJR Order.  The defendant also challenged the order on Due Process grounds, as there was no post-attachment hearing because of COVID-19 protocols.  The Appellate Court held that the use of previously filed summary judgment affidavits (which meet a high evidentiary burden), expressly incorporating them by reference into the PJR Application to establish the lower, “probable cause” threshold for prejudgment remedies, fulfilled the statutory requirements governing prejudgment remedies, such that the trial court properly exercised its statutory authority in granting the PJR Application.  As for the Due Process challenge, Attorney Gilmore successfully argued that subsequent events in the case – including the entry of a judgment of strict foreclosure in favor of the plaintiff – rendered that challenge moot because the final judgment in favor of the plaintiff unquestionably established probable cause and the Appellate Court could not provide any practical relief to the defendant in the face of that judgment. 

Click the link below to read the judgement -
https://uks.box.com/s/uskvq40uewv23qy08nquzfk31gcp508p