Case Name: Reba ATWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITIZENS STATE BANK, Defendant-Respondent
Court: Missouri Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1987-10-07
Citations: 737 S.W.2d 527
Docket Number: No. 15116
Parties: Reba ATWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITIZENS STATE BANK, Defendant-Respondent.
Judges: HOGAN, FLANIGAN and MAUS, JJ., concur.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 737
Pages: 527–528

Head Matter:
Reba ATWELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITIZENS STATE BANK, Defendant-Respondent.
No. 15116.
Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division Two.
Oct. 7, 1987.
Loren R. Honecker, Richard D. Bender, Sherwood, Honecker & Bender, Springfield, for plaintiff-appellant.
Warren S. Stafford, Kevin M. FitzGerald, Taylor, Stafford, Woody, Cowherd & Clithero, Springfield, for defendant-respondent.

Opinion:
PREWITT, Judge.
Defendant held a note, the payment of which was secured by a deed of trust upon real property owned by plaintiff. Defendant instituted foreclosure proceedings, contending that the deed of trust was violated because insurance was not maintained on the premises. Plaintiff then obtained insurance covering the premises and notified defendant, but it refused to terminate the foreclosure proceedings. Thereafter, plaintiff secured a new loan on the property, paid the note and the foreclosure proceedings were stopped.
Plaintiff then brought this action contending that defendant wrongfully commenced and continued proceedings to foreclose her property. Trial was started before a jury and at the close of plaintiff's evidence, the trial court directed a verdict for defendant. Judgment was entered accordingly and plaintiff appealed from that judgment.
Since this matter was briefed and argued here the Missouri Supreme Court has ruled that there is no cause of action for attempted wrongful foreclosure in this state. See Reese v. First Missouri Bank and Trust Company of Creve Coeur, 736 S.W.2d 371 (1987). This court must follow that decision. Mo. Const. Art. V, § 2. The trial court properly directed a verdict for defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
HOGAN, FLANIGAN and MAUS, JJ., concur.