Citibank, N.A. v. Groshens
Annotate this CaseCitibank, 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
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.