Citibank, N.A. v. Groshens

Citibank, N.A. v. Groshens (2000-537); 171 Vt. 639; 768 A.2d 1272 

[Filed 28-Dec-2000]


                                 ENTRY ORDER

                      SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO. 2000-537

                             DECEMBER TERM, 2000


Citibank, N.A.	                       }	APPEALED FROM:
                                       }
                                       }
     v.	                               }	Windsor Superior Court
                                       }	
Debra L. Groshens	               }
                                       }	DOCKET NO. 561-11-99 Wrcv


             In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:


       Appellee Citibank, N.A.'s motion to dismiss the above appeal is
  granted.  Appellee was  awarded a default judgment of foreclosure against
  appellant Debra L. Groshens in February 2000,  with the redemption period
  to expire in August 2000.   In September 2000, after the redemption  period
  had expired, appellant filed a motion to reopen the judgment.  The superior
  court denied the  motion, and appellant filed a notice of appeal.  Appellee
  asks this Court to dismiss the appeal for  lack of jurisdiction because
  appellant never sought permission to appeal from the judgment of 
  foreclosure.  See 12 V.S.A. § 4601 ("When a judgment is for foreclosure of
  mortgage, permission of  the court shall be required for review.");
  V.R.C.P. 80.1(m) (permission to appeal from foreclosure  judgment shall be
  filed within ten days of entry of judgment); Denlinger v. Mudgett, 151 Vt.
  208,  210-11 (1989) (compliance with § 4601 "is required in order to give
  this Court jurisdiction to  review").  We agree with appellee that the
  legislative policy of promoting the finality of foreclosure  judgments
  would be thwarted if § 4601 could be circumvented simply by filing a motion
  to reopen  weeks or months after the entry of the foreclosure judgment. 
  This is particularly true in situations  such as this where the redemption
  period has expired.  Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack  of
  jurisdiction.




 	                               BY THE COURT:


                                       _______________________________________
                                       Jeffrey L. Amestoy, Chief Justice

                                       _______________________________________
                                       John A. Dooley, Associate Justice

                                       _______________________________________
                                       James L. Morse, Associate Justice
			
			               _______________________________________
                                       Denise R. Johnson, Associate Justice

                                       _______________________________________
                                       Marilyn S. Skoglund, Associate Justice