In Madison v. Groseth, Ms. Madison borrowed money to buy a home and after she fell behind in her payments, she started filing lawsuits.  A trustee’s sale was scheduled and she filed a lawsuit in which the relief she sought included an injunction against the trustee’s sale.  However, she did not actually obtain a preliminary injunction against the trustee’s sale and it took place.  Thereafter, Ms. Madison sued the lender and the buyer of her home at the trustee’s sale.  In that lawsuit she complained of the handling of the trustee’s sale notice including that she was not notified of the sale date.  That lawsuit was dismissed and Ms. Madison appealed.  The new owners even filed an eviction to remove Ms. Madison, who filed bankruptcy. But that did not delay anything, because she was the one who appealed.  The Court of Appeals ruled that ARS 33-811(c) provided no help to Ms. Madison because he had filed suit to enjoin the trustee’s sale in advance of the sale itself.  Therefore, her failure to obtain an injunction barred her complaint about any inadequacies in the trustee’s sale procedures.  However, the Court of Appeals did reverse the finding of the superior court that Ms. Madison was a “vexatious litigant” and barring her from filing further lawsuits, on the grounds that the superior court had not also found that the previous lawsuits were frivolous.  No word yet on whether Ms. Madison has filed another suit after the lifting of her title as vexatious litigant.