Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District, Fort Worth
LAURIE B. GRADY APPELLANT
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, AND U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR SPECIALTY UNDERWRITING AND RESIDENTIAL FINANCE TRUST MORTGAGE LOAN ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-BC5 APPELLEES
THE 236TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY TRIAL COURT NO.
SUDDERTH, C.J.; KERR and PITTMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION 
ELIZABETH KERR, JUSTICE
Appellant Laurie B. Grady defaulted on her home-equity loan,
the noteholder, Appellee U.S. Bank National Association, as
Trustee for Specialty Underwriting and Residential Finance
Trust Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series
2006-BC5, successfully sued for an order allowing it to
foreclose on its lien. Grady then sued U.S. Bank and the
current loan servicer, Appellee Nationstar Mortgage, LLC,
alleging that the lien was unenforceable. The trial court
granted U.S. Bank and Nationstar's summary-judgment
motion, and Grady has appealed. We will affirm.
2006, Grady executed a "Texas Home Equity Security
Instrument" in National City Mortgage's favor to
secure the repayment of a "Texas Home Equity Note"
in the original principal amount of $135, 200. Grady
defaulted, and on August 9, 2010, the then-current loan
servicer wrote her that the loan was in default and that she
had to pay $33, 070.56 to cure the default. The letter also
stated that if the default was not cured before September 8,
2010, the note would be accelerated and foreclosure
proceedings would begin.
failed to cure, and in 2014 U.S. Bank filed for a
home-equity-foreclosure order in the 342nd District
Court. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 735, 736. In
June 2015, that court signed an order allowing U.S. Bank to
foreclose on its lien. The trustee's sale was noticed for
August 4, 2015.
the day before the foreclosure sale, Grady sued U.S. Bank and
Nationstar in the 236th District Court, alleging that because
the note was accelerated in 2007, the four-year statute of
limitations in civil practices and remedies code section
16.035 barred U.S. Bank and Nationstar from enforcing the
lien. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem.
Code Ann. § 16.035 (West 2002). She pleaded claims for
breach of contract and for violations of the property code
and the Texas Debt Collection Act. In addition to damages and
attorney's fees, Grady sought-
. an order quieting title to the property;
. a declaration that U.S. Bank's and
Nationstar's actions violated the debt-collection act;
. a declaration that limitations bars
enforcement of the lien;
. an injunction prohibiting U.S. Bank and
Nationstar from violating the debt-collection act; and
. an injunction preventing any foreclosure
or forcible-detainer proceedings or any other action
interfering with Grady's use or possession of the
Bank and Nationstar moved for no-evidence summary judgment
and for judgment as a matter of law. Grady filed a response,
but the trial court granted U.S. Bank and Nationstar's
motion without specifying the grounds for its ruling and
dismissed Grady's claims with prejudice. Grady has
appealed, raising two issues: (1) the trial court erred by
granting summary judgment because limitations bars any
attempted foreclosure of the claimed lien, and (2) the trial
court erred by granting ...