Trial Court found the foreclosing entity failed to satisfy the business records exception to the hearsay rule, so the trial court erred by admitting the payment history into evidence. Without sufficient evidence to determine the amount due under the note and mortgage, the trial court erred in entering a foreclosure judgment in favor of the bank.

The Court also found that the bank had failed to comply with the acceleration language found in the note, but such failure did not warrant dismissal.  Rather, the trial court should have entered a judgment of foreclosure only for the amount past due on the note at the time of trial, and not the full accelerated balance of principal.

The appellate court affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for a redetermination of the amounts allegedly due and owing as well as providing the bank leave to properly prove compliance with the acceleration paragraph.



Tags: ,