The moving defendants sought to set aside an earlier summary judgment enforcing mortgages, alleging fresh evidence and fraud arising from later bankruptcy and regulatory investigations connected to non-party individuals involved in the underlying transactions.
Applying the fresh evidence test under Rule 59.06(2), the court held the alleged new evidence did not probably change the prior result and amounted largely to suspicion and innuendo rather than proof that the impugned mortgages or quantum findings were affected.
The court nevertheless ordered the plaintiff mortgagee to provide an accounting of proceeds from the sale of the mortgaged properties and any income received from those properties, given the uncertainty surrounding related transactions and the need for transparency.
Requests to pay sale proceeds into court and to compel further discovery were refused.
