Federal courts lack jurisdiction to consider borrowers' claims that arise out of a state court foreclosure proceeding, the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland recently ruled.

Parker v. Investire involved claims by a borrower related to a mortgage foreclosure action that was litigated in Maryland state court and was initially uncontested. The property was sold at foreclosure sale, and the final order ratifying the sale was entered by the state court. Thereafter, judgment of possession was entered in favor of the purchaser. The borrower filed an unsuccessful appeal, and the state court ordered the borrowers to vacate the property.

Thereafter, the borrowers filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court, asserting a claim for quiet title, asking the Court to enter a temporary injunction, and set aside the sale.

The Court summarily rejected the borrower’s effort to forestall enforcement of the possession order, and sua sponte dismissed the complaint. The Court held that the Anti-Injunction Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2283 precluded the Court from enjoining the state court proceedings, or granting declaratory relief regarding his rights to the property. The Court also ruled that it  lacked federal question jurisdiction, noting that "foreclosure actions brought under state law do not give rise to federal question subject matter jurisdiction […] nothing in simple foreclosure action of real property suggests the presence of a federal question."

As this opinion illustrates, the Anti-Injunction Act can prevent borrowers from collaterally attacking state court foreclosure proceedings. While not all claims are handled as expeditiously as those asserted in Parker, most cases can be disposed of through a motion to dismiss.