FARA MANUFACTURING CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF MIAMI, A UNITED STATES CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Defendants in a mortgage foreclosure appeal a deficiency judgment, arguing the trial court erred by entering the judgment without evidence of fair market value. The Florida appellate court affirmed, holding that defendants bear the burden of presenting evidence of fair market value, and absent such evidence, the court may presume the foreclosure sale price reflects fair market value.
A deficiency judgment may be properly entered without evidence of fair market value presented by the defendant. Upon introduction of the sale price, the defendant has the burden of going forward with evidence of fair market value, and absent such evidence, the trial court may presume the sale price reflects fair market value.
[1] The price bid at a mortgage foreclosure sale is not necessarily conclusive of the property's value when determining a deficiency judgment.
[2] Upon introduction of evidence of the sale price in a deficiency judgment proceeding, the burden shifts to the defendant to present evidence of the property's fair market…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the price bid, and for which realty is sold, at a mortgage foreclosure sale, although conclusive with regard to the efficacy of sale in absence of timely objection thereto, is not necessarily conclusive with regard to the value of property sold on application for a deficiency decree”
Establishes the foundational rule that foreclosure sale price and fair market value are distinct concepts in deficiency proceedings
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA mortgage foreclosure sale occurred on real property. The lender (First Federal) obtained a deficiency judgment against the defendants for the differ…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Deficiency Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PEARSON, Judge.
The defendants to a mortgage foreclosure on real property appeal a deficiency judgment against them. The point presented on appeal urges error because there was no evidence before the trial judge of the fair market value of the property.
The rule is clearly that the price bid, and for which realty is sold, at a mortgage foreclosure sale, although conclusive with regard to the efficacy of sale in absence of timely objection thereto, is not necessarily conclusive with regard to the value of property sold on application for a deficiency decree. Weinstein v. Park Manor Construction Company, 166 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964). See also Fulton v. R. K. Cooper Construction Company, 208 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967), and Jonas v. Bar-Jam Corp., 170 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965). There is no Florida case holding that in the absence of evidence of the fair market value that a deficiency decree may not be entered. The proper rule is that upon the introduction of the evidence of the sale price, the defendant has the burden of going forward and presenting such evidence as he shall find proper concerning the fair market value of the property. In the absence of such evidence, the trial court has the power to act upon the assumption that the sale price reflects the fair market value.
In the present instance, the defendants had full notice of plaintiffs’ motion for deficiency judgment and every opportunity to proceed with such evidence as they thought proper. Inasmuch as no evidence of fair market value was introduced, other than the sale price, the deficiency judgment was properly entered.1
Affirmed.
. Section 45.031(7), Florida Statutes (1977), states:
“VALUE OF PROPERTY. — The amount of the bid for the property at the sale shall be conclusively presumed to be sufficient consideration for the sale. * * * If the case is one in which a deficiency judgment may be sought and application is made for a deficiency, the amount bid at the sale may be considered by the court as one of the factors in determining a deficiency under the usual equitable principles." [Emphasis Added]
55 Am.Jur.2d Mortgages § 922 says, in part:
“Where the circumstances are such that the mortgagor may defend a deficiency action on the ground that the mortgaged property was sold for less than its fair market value, he has the burden of proving that a higher price should have been obtained.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Thunderbird, Ltd. v. Great Am. Ins. Co., 566 So. 2d 1296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…ut it was nonetheless sufficient evidence below to shift the burden to appellants of going forward with other evidence concerning fair market value of the property. Fara Manufacturing Co., Inc. v. First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Miami, 366 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). A legal presumption exists that the foreclosure sale price equals the fair market value of the property. Withers v. Flagship Peoples Bank of Tallahassee, 473 So. 2d 789, 791 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Thus, once Great American pre…
-
Liberty Bus. Credit Corp. v. Schaffer/Dunadry, 589 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…ing a deficiency judgment introduces evidence of the foreclosure sale price, the burden shifts to the judgment debtor to present evidence concerning the property’s fair market value. Fara Mfg. Co., Inc. v. First Federal Sav. and Loan Ass’n of Miami, 366 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Thunderbird, 566 So. 2d at 1299. The instant record reflects that the appellant presented a copy of the certificate of sale, reflecting the sale price, to the trial court at the hearing. Once this evidence was presented, the app…
-
Bruno v. Travelers Ins. Co., 386 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…nt Employees Ins. Co. v. Friedman, 344 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). . The present panel of this court has recently followed Richardson, and rejected the applicability of Allen to a very similar situation. Par-do v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co., 366 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Royal Flagg Jonas and Barbara Jonas v. Bar-Jam Corp., 170 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Fulton v. R. K. Cooper Constr. Co., 208 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)
- Fla. E. Coast R.R. Co. v. Jones, 166 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Weinstein v. Park Manor Constr. Co., Inc., 166 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)