Legal Opinion

Citimortgage, Inc. v. Barabas

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided October 20, 2011No. 48A04-1004-CC-232PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION ON REHEARING

RILEY, Judge.

Citi filed a petition for rehearing of our 2011 Opinion. In that Opinion, we affirmed the trial court’s denial of amended default judgment in favor of ReCasa. We grant Citi’s petition for rehearing to clarify our reasoning, but reaffirm our opinion in all respects.

On rehearing, Citi first argues that our interpretation of Ind.Code § 32-29-8-3 was erroneous. We agree that the correct interpretation of the statute is that the one-year redemption period begins after the sale of the property, not after Citi first acquired interest in the property. However, we find…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Citimortgage, Inc. v. BarabasIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Citimortgage, Inc. v. Shannon S. Barabas a/k/a Shannon Sheets Barabas, ReCasa Financial Group, LLC, and Rick A. SandersIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Citimortgage, Inc. v. BarabasIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API