One such affirmative defense is collateral estoppel. See, e.g., Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, 2015 WL 2452418, at *5 (D. Md. May 20, 2015). In addition to accepting the well-pled allegations of the complaint as true, a district court may properly "take judicial notice of facts from a prior judicial proceeding when the [collateral estoppel] defense raises no disputed issue of fact."
Plaintiff's injury stems from her interest in the Property from a recorded deed. See ECF No. 33-8 at 15; cf. Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *4 (D. Md. May 20, 2015) (finding standing lacking where there was no recorded deed because "[w]ithout ownership, Mr. Graves would not suffer any injury from Defendant's actions with regard to the Property."), reconsideration denied sub nom. Graves v. OneWest Bank, No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 6769115 (D. Md. Nov. 2, 2015), aff'd sub nom. Graves v. Onewest Bank, FSB, 653 F. App'x 788 (4th Cir. 2016). Moreover, Plaintiff's allegation of a recession directly challenges the validity of the lien and the right of the lender to foreclose as contemplated by Maryland law.
Accordingly, Count III is dismissed with prejudice. Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, Civ. No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *7 (D. Md. May 20, 2015) (dismissing with prejudice on basis of collateral estoppel).
Thus, a “ratification of sale constitutes a final judgment for preclusion purposes.” Proctor, 289 F.Supp.3d at 684; Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *6 (D. Md. May 20, 2015), recons.
While a lack of standing is generally not grounds for dismissal with prejudice since it is a jurisdictional defect, there is an exception for situations in which the defect in question is incurable. See Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *7 (D. Md. May 20, 2015) (citing McLean v. United States, 566 F.3d 391, 400 (4th Cir. 2009)); Tyco Healthcare Grp. LP v. Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., 587 F.3d 1375, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
'When a state court finalizes a foreclosure after the "plaintiff was given an opportunity to raise all objections to the foreclosure sale of [a] property,["] that adjudication is a final judgment on the merits.'" (quoting Capel v. Countrywide Home Loans, Nos. WDQ-09-2374, WDQ-09-2439, 2010 WL 457534, at *4 (D. Md. Feb. 3, 2010))); Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *6 (D. Md. May 20, 2015), recons. denied, 2015 WL 6769115 (D. Md. Nov. 2, 2015), aff'd, 653 F. App'x 788 (4th Cir. 2016). Therefore, there was a final judgment on the merits.
If all issues raised in this suit are identical to the issues presented in the previous suit, then dismissal is appropriate. E.g., Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *1 (D. Md. May 20, 2015). Maryland law regarding collateral estoppel applies because the relevant prior proceeding was in a Maryland state court, and this Court "must give to [the] state court judgment the same preclusive effect as would be given that judgment under the law of the State in which the judgment was rendered."
'When a state court finalizes a foreclosure after the "plaintiff was given an opportunity to raise all objections to the foreclosure sale of [a] property,["] that adjudication is a final judgment on the merits.'" (quoting Capel v. Countrywide Home Loans, Nos. WDQ-09-2374, WDQ-09-2439, 2010 WL 457534, at *4 (D. Md. Feb. 3, 2010) (quoting Anyanwutaku v. Fleet Mortg. Grp., 85 F. Supp. 2d 566, 572 (D. Md. 2000)))); Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *6 (D. Md. May 20, 2015), recons. denied, 2015 WL 6769115 (D. Md. Nov. 2, 2015), aff'd, 653 F. App'x 788 (4th Cir. 2016). During the Foreclosure Action, Peden filed a motion "in the Nature of a Motion for Dismissal," State Ct. Docket No. 22, which the state court denied on September 17, 2015.
‘When a state court finalizes a foreclosure after the "plaintiff was given an opportunity to raise all objections to the foreclosure sale of [a] property,["] that adjudication is a final judgment on the merits.’ " (quoting Capel v. Countrywide Home Loans , Nos. WDQ–09–2374, WDQ–09–2439, 2010 WL 457534, at *4 (D. Md. Feb. 3, 2010) )); Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB , No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *6 (D. Md. May 20, 2015), recons. denied , 2015 WL 6769115 (D. Md. Nov. 2, 2015), aff'd , 653 Fed.Appx. 788 (4th Cir. 2016). Therefore, there was a final judgment on the merits.
"[F]inal judgment includes any prior adjudication of an issue in another action that is determined to he sufficiently firm to he accorded conclusive effect, based on factors such as whether the parties were heard in the issue and whether the decision was appealable." Graves v. OneWest Bank, FSB, No. PWG-14-1995, 2015 WL 2452418, at *5 (D. Md. May 20, 2015), aff'd sub nom., Graves v. Onewest Bank. FSB, 653 F. App'x 788 (4th Cir. 2016) (citing Morgan v. Morgan, 68 Md. App. 85 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1986)) (emphasis in Morgan). Unless the court specifies otherwise in its order, any dismissal "other than a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, for improper venue, or for failure to join a party under Rule 19, operates as an adjudication upon the merits."