Legal Opinion · Dissent

Nationstar Mortgage LLC v. Harris

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Decided May 14, 2014No. 2013-CA-1335Published

1DissentLove, J.

Id respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the alleged “title clearing actions” taken by the Lender constitute a “step” in furtherance of the prosecution in order to hold that the Lender’s Executory Foreclosure Case was not abandoned.

“Article 561 was designed to prevent protracted litigation filed for purposes of harassment or without a serious intent to hasten the claim to judgment.” Prestenback v. Hearn, 11-1380, p. 4 (La.App. 4 Cir. 2/22/12), 85 So.3d 256, 259.

Dismissal for abandonment is not intended to be punitive; rather, it balances two competing policy considerations:…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Prestenback v. HearnLouisiana Court of Appeal · 2012
  2. Freedlander, Inc. v. CertainLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API