Legal Opinion
United States v. Scurry
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided February 21, 2008PublishedCited by 75 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Rivera-Soto
A homeowner facing foreclosure and dispossession is entitled to procedural protection. As one of several means of corroborating adherence to those procedural requirements, a party who secures an order allowing a sheriffs sale “shall, at least 10 days prior to the date set for sale, serve a notice of sale by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, upon [the homeowner].” R. 4:65-2.
In this case, the foreclosing mortgagee did not serve the order authorizing the sheriffs sale of the homeowner’s residence in the manner required by the Rule, and the homeowner only learned of the sale…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Flagg v. Essex County ProsecutorSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2002
- Knorr v. SmealSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2003
- County of Morris v. FauverSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
- Borough of Princeton v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders of Mercer Cty.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2001
- O'Keefe v. Passaic Valley Water CommissionSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by75 opinions
- Guido v. Duane Morris LLP.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2010
- Chance v. McCannNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2009
- State v. BelliardNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2010
- State v. TriestmanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2010
- Saffos v. Avaya, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2011
70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.