Texas Business Court Addresses Notice Requirements for Foreclosure Sales

In a July 28, 2026, memorandum opinion, the Texas Business Court held that a lender’s foreclosure notices satisfied contractual and statutory requirements, even though they were sent by UPS next-day delivery and email rather than by certified mail. In Revere Tactical Opportunities Fund IV, LP, et al. v. Monte K. Lee-Wen, Judge Bill Whitehill of the First Division addressed challenges to the lender’s delivery method and its notice to a designated agent.

Link to Background Background

Revere Tactical Opportunities Fund IV, LP and Revere Tactical Opportunities REIT, LLC (together, Revere) made a loan to Westside Flats Owner LLC, secured by two real properties. After Westside allegedly defaulted on that loan, Revere sent notices of its intent to sell the properties at a foreclosure sale. Both the deeds of trust and Texas Property Code § 51.002(b)(3) called for notice of the intended sale by “certified mail” at least 21 days before the sale. However, Revere sent the notices by email and UPS next-day delivery. Westside argued that Revere’s failure to use certified mail constituted a material breach that rendered the foreclosure wrongful.

A separate but related question involved Revere’s dealings with CG Sunset Land, LLC, which had pledged one of the parcels. Revere addressed its notice for that property to “Casoro Group, LLC,” the agent and address the deed of trust designated for CG Sunset, rather than to CG Sunset by name. CG Sunset claimed it received no proper notice, while conceding that its designated agent received the notice at the designated address.

Link to The Court’s Analysis The Court’s Analysis

Contractual notice. The court noted that the deeds of trust contained two relevant provisions. Section 7.02 required notice of intent to sell by certified mail, while Section 8.03 provided that all notices “required or permitted to be given” would be “considered as properly given” if delivered by an independent third-party commercial delivery service for same-day or next-day delivery. Westside argued that the specific certified-mail requirement should control over the general provision. The court concluded that the deeds of trust were unambiguous and that the provisions did not conflict, so the specific-controls-general canon did not apply. The court held that Section 8.03 deemed commercial delivery proper even where a notice would otherwise be technically improper; for that provision to have any function, it had to apply in exactly that situation.

Statutory compliance. Texas Property Code § 51.002(b)(3) also calls for certified mail. The court noted that case law distinguishes between a notice of intent to sell and a notice of a completed sale, and that for a notice of intent to sell, alternative service suffices if the debtor receives timely notice. Because it was undisputed that Westside (or its agent) received the notices no later than it would have under certified mail, the court concluded that Revere sufficiently complied with the statute.

Notice to a designated agent. The court observed that the deed of trust itself designated Casoro Group and its address as CG Sunset’s address for notice, and it was undisputed that Casoro Group received the notice there. Applying the principle that notice to an agent acting within the scope of its authority is notice to the principal, the court held that CG Sunset received the notice as a matter of law and that omitting “CG Sunset Land, LLC” from the address line was immaterial.

The court ultimately granted Revere’s Rule 166(g) motion for determination of legal matters and denied a separate condition-precedent motion without prejudice as unnecessary.

Link to Considerations for Businesses Considerations for Businesses

Companies engaged in foreclosure-related disputes should consider the following when evaluating notice requirements:

1. Read notice provisions together. A general “deemed proper” delivery clause may shape how a specific certified-mail requirement is applied, so parties may wish to draft and review such provisions with consideration for how they interact.
2. Confirm actual, timely receipt. For a notice of intent to sell, timely receipt may matter as much as the delivery method.
3. Honor agent and address designations. Delivery to a designated agent may be treated as notice to the borrower, so borrowers should consider keeping that information current. Lenders should consider sending any necessary notices exactly as designated by the recipient.
4. Preserve proof of delivery. Retain tracking information and delivery confirmations to establish timely receipt.
5. Treat strict compliance as a more prudent course. The court found the alternative delivery sufficient here, but using the specified method of certified mail may help reduce the risk of a dispute.