The existence of title "issues" or breaks in the title chain of purchasers at a foreclosure sale are not necessarily fatal in a post-foreclosure eviction case. This is the case because in post-foreclosure evictions, title issues need not be resolved before the issue of possession can be determined.
Rather, a foreclosure under a deed of trust establishes a landlord and tenant-at-sufferance relationship between the parties, under the express language of the Deed of Trust (usually paragraph 22). Based on this language and the contractual agreement contained in the Deed of Trust, there is an independent basis to determine the issue of immediate possession without resolving the issue of title to the property.
Thus, where a deed of trust permits nonjudicial foreclosure and where such foreclosure (under a deed of trust contractually creates a landlord and tenant-at-sufferance relationship between the foreclosed party and the purchaser at a Substitute Trustee's sale, it is not necessary to resolve a title dispute to determine the right of immediate possession. See Jaimes, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 14615, at *13; Hornsby, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 6880, at *7 ("Although [appellant] challenges the chain of title to the property, `the merits of the title shall not be adjudicated' in a forcible detainer action." (quoting former Tex. R. Civ. P. 746)); Stephens v. Federal Home Loan Mortg. Corp., No. 02-10-00251-CV, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 3056, at *5 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth Apr. 21, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (holding Federal Home was not required to "connect the dots" between original lender and mortgage servicer regarding title); Deubler v. Bank of New York Mellon, No. 02-10-00125-CV, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 2644, at *3-4 (Tex. App.-Fort Worth Apr. 7, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.) (holding party was not required to present evidence establishing linkage between deed of trust and substitute trustee's deed to establish superior right to possession); Kaldis v. Aurora Loan Servs., No. 01-09-00270-CV, 2010 Tex. App. LEXIS 4831, at *7 (Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] June 24, 2010, pet. dism'd w.o.j.) (mem. op.) (noting that purchaser to whom property was conveyed by substitute trustee's deed was not required to prove merits of its title to prove superior right to possession in its forcible-detainer action).
