## Facts

- United Bank of Illinois, N.A. foreclosed a mortgage on property owned by Kenneth and Elizabeth Vosberg.
- A sheriff’s sale occurred on November 22, 1983; Lawrence Marino attended intending to decide whether to bid.
- Marino did not conduct a title search or consult an attorney before bidding.
- At the sale, Marino asked the deputy sheriff about liens; the deputy indicated liens existed and directed Marino to the attending attorney.
- Linda Kream, appearing in place of the bank’s regular foreclosure attorney, reviewed the file and stated there did not “appear to be any” other liens, but warned she was unfamiliar with the case and that Marino should not rely on her statement.
- Marino bid $13,541, purchased the property, and the trial court confirmed the sale.
- Marino later discovered superior liens and was joined as a defendant in separate litigation by a lienholder.
- Marino moved in the foreclosure case to vacate the sale and recover his purchase money, asserting misrepresentation and asserting the bank had a duty to join all lienholders.
- The trial court initially vacated the sale, then on reconsideration reinstated the order confirming the sale; Marino appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the purchaser was entitled to vacate the sheriff’s sale and recover the purchase price based on alleged fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation about encumbrances.
2. Whether the doctrine of caveat emptor governing judicial sales barred relief for undiscovered title defects absent fraud, misrepresentation, or a qualifying mistake of fact.
3. Whether the foreclosing mortgagee had a legal duty to search for and join all lienholders for the benefit of a judicial-sale purchaser, such that failure to do so justified rescission.

## Decision

- The appellate court affirmed the order confirming the sheriff’s sale and denying rescission.
- The court held the purchaser did not prove fraudulent misrepresentation and did not establish grounds for negligent misrepresentation warranting vacation of the sale.
- The court applied caveat emptor to judicial sales, placing the risk of title defects on the purchaser absent fraud, misrepresentation, or mistake of fact.
- The court rejected the claim that the bank owed the purchaser a duty to search for and join all lienholders, and held omission of lienholders did not itself provide a basis to set aside the sale.

## Legal Principles

- Caveat emptor governs judicial sales; the purchaser bears the risk of title defects unless there is fraud, misrepresentation, or mistake of fact.
- Fraudulent misrepresentation requires a false statement of material fact, knowledge or belief of falsity, intent to induce action, reasonable reliance, and resulting damage.
- A qualified, uncertain statement or opinion—especially when accompanied by an express disclaimer—generally is not an actionable misrepresentation and can defeat any claim of reasonable reliance by putting a reasonable person on inquiry.
- A foreclosure plaintiff’s failure to join all lienholders affects the binding effect and priority consequences of the judgment, but does not create a purchaser’s right to rescind the judicial sale.

## Conclusion

The court held that a bidder at a foreclosure sale who forgoes independent investigation cannot rescind merely because superior liens later appear, where the alleged assurance about encumbrances was expressly qualified and not reasonably relied upon, and where the foreclosing mortgagee had no purchaser-protective duty to identify and join every lienholder.


Marino v. United Bank of Ill., N.A., 484 N.E.2d 935 (Ill. App. Ct. 1985)