River Forest Inc. v. United Bank

The trial court properly confirmed the non-judicial foreclosure sales of several properties as evidence supported the finding that the properties sold for at least their true market value.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In these consolidated appeals, appellants River Forest, Inc. and David Aldridge challenge the trial court’s orders confirming the non-judicial foreclosure sale of several properties that appellee United Bank the “Bank” held as security for a commercial loan to appellants. In A12A2163, appellants contest the foreclosure of four lots adjacent to the river in the River Forest subdivision in Monroe county the “Four River Lots”. Appellants contend that the trial court’s finding that the Four River Lots sold for their true market value is not supported by any evidence. In A12A2164, appellants contest the foreclosure of eight commercial lots located just outside the entrance of River Forest subdivision in Monroe County and one residential lot, identified as Lot R-34, located within the River Forest subdivision collectively, the “Nine Lots”. Appellants contend that the trial court erred in confirming the foreclosure of the Nine Lots, arguing that the Bank did not prove that the eight commercial properties sold for “at least their true market value under the usual market conditions of sales of commercial property.” The appeals have been consolidated for disposition in a single opinion, and finding no error, we affirm.

In confirming a non-judicial foreclosure sale under OCGA § 44-14-161, the trial court “shall require evidence to show the true market value of the property sold under the powers and shall not confirm the sale unless it is satisfied that the property so sold brought its true market value on such foreclosure sale.”1 The trial judge in a confirmation proceeding “sits as the trier of fact, and its findings and conclusions have the effect of a jury verdict.”2 Thus, “witness credibility and the weight of the evidence proffered by the parties at a confirmation hearing are to be judged by the trial court, and not this Court on appeal.”3 For this reason, we will not disturb the trial court’s decision if there is any evidence to support it,4 and we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s judgment.5

River Forest Inc. v. United Bank

The trial court properly confirmed the non-judicial foreclosure sales of several properties as evidence supported the finding that the properties sold for at least their true market value.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report