United States District Court, D. New Hampshire
Roxanne Moore, pro se
Michael. T. McCormack, Esq.
A. DiClerico, Jr. United States District Judge
Moore, proceeding pro se, filed suit against the United
States Department of Agriculture (the “USDA”)
seeking an injunction to prevent a foreclosure sale on her
home located at 8 Half Moon Lane, Kingston, New Hampshire
(the “Half Moon Property”). The USDA moves for
summary judgment. Moore did not file a response.
judgment is appropriate when the moving party “shows
that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and
the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). “A genuine issue of material fact
only exists if a reasonable factfinder . . . could resolve
the dispute in that party's favor.” Town of
Westport v. Monsanto Co., 877 F.3d 58, 64-65 (1st Cir.
2017) (internal quotation marks omitted). The court must take
the facts and draw all reasonable inferences in the light
most favorable to the nonmoving party. McGunigle v. City
of Quincy, 835 F.3d 192, 202 (1st Cir. 2016).
noted above, Moore did not file a response to the USDA's
motion for summary judgment. In this district, when a party
does not file an opposition to a motion for summary judgment,
all properly supported facts in the moving party's
memorandum are deemed admitted. LR 56.1(b). Therefore, the
facts presented by the USDA in support of the motion for
summary judgment are deemed to be admitted by Moore.
granted the USDA a 30-year mortgage on the Half Moon Property
on August 31, 1988, in the amount of $95, 000.00. Moore has
not made a voluntary payment on the mortgage since January 7,
2013. The mortgage is in default and, as of November 6, 2018,
had a total amount due of $128, 428.75, including $42, 709.89
in fees and interest.
on the materials Moore filed with her complaint, the USDA has
sent Moore notices that she was in arrears on her mortgage
payments, granted her a two-year moratorium on payments that
expired in October 2015, addressed her mortgage subsidy
agreement, and, finally, sent notices of planned foreclosure.
Moore responded to at least some of the notices asking for
information and explaining her difficult circumstances. After
receiving notice of a foreclosure sale of the Half Moon
Property scheduled for February 20, 2018, Moore filed a
“Complaint to Enjoin Foreclosure Sale” in state
court on February 20, 2018. The USDA removed the case to this
court a week later, on February 27, 2018.
USDA argues that Moore cannot succeed in her suit to enjoin
the foreclosure sale because Moore's mortgage is in
default. It further argues that, under the default provision
in the mortgage agreement, it has the right to foreclose on
and sell the property. Therefore, the USDA argues, it has the
legal right to foreclose on the property.
mortgage agreement provides in pertinent part:
SHOULD DEFAULT occur in the performance or discharge of any
obligation in this instrument or secured by this instrument,
. . . the Government, at its option, with or without notice,
may . . . (d) ...