Pro se defendants have managed to vacate their post-foreclosure eviction. The defendants lost their home in Harwich after the mortgage was foreclosed in 2020.
Two years later they were still living in the house. The investor who purchased the house at the foreclosure auction filed a complaint in housing court to evict them.
Prior to trial the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the investor’s lawsuit. The motion argued, in part, that the foreclosure auction was “fraudulent” and thus the sale did not convey title to the investor.
Along with the motion, the defendant submitted a usb which contained video of the foreclosure auction.
The judge denied the motion and the case proceeded to trial.
During trial an exchange between the judge and one of the defendants strongly suggested that the judge had not opened the usb that accompanied the denied motion.
The defendant lost at trial and appeal the decision.
The Appeals Court held that the judge’s apparent failure to review the usb exhibit before denying the motion to dismiss was grounds to vacate the trial’s verdict.
Here…there is no indication that the judge considered the evidence relating to their claim of irregularities in the 2020 foreclosure auction. In the circumstances presented, this omission requires vacating the judgment and remanding the case for a new trial.
The full opinion is attached below.