EVELYN M. MORGAN, SUE MORGAN, GLADYS MORGAN, DAVID MORGAN, THERESA MORGAN MORTON AND CYNTHIA MORGAN DAVENPORT, APPELLANTS,
v.
DUDLEY KEARNEY AND CENTURY ELEVATOR CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
Heirs of a seller appealed from orders denying a deficiency judgment motion against a buyer who defaulted on a promissory note secured by collateral from a 1969 business sale. The appellate court affirmed due to the lack of an adequate record of the deficiency hearing proceedings.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's orders denying the deficiency judgment motion because there was no adequate record of the deficiency hearing proceedings available for appellate review.
[1] A deficiency judgment may be denied when the record of the deficiency hearing is insufficient or unusable.
[2] An appellate court must affirm a trial court's order when there is no usable record of the proceedings below.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“There was no record made of the hearing upon appellants' motion for deficiency judgment and the trial court's orders are devoid of any finding of fact or specificity of grounds for denial.”
Establishes the fundamental problem preventing appellate review—the absence of an adequate record of the proceedings.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1969, Kearney purchased a business (Hollywood Elevator Cab Co.) from Donald E. Morgan for $165,000, executing a promissory note secured by a Securi…
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 Statement Of Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is a timely appeal from two orders which denied a motion for deficiency judgment sought against appellee, Dudley Kear-ney, pursuant to Section 702.06, Florida Statutes (1979), and a subsequent order which denied appellant’s motion for rehearing.
In 1969 appellee Kearney purchased a business from Donald E. Morgan known as Hollywood Elevator Cab Co. and located in Hollywood, Florida. As part of the purchase, Kearney executed a promissory note in the principal sum of $165,000, secured by a Security Agreement/Chattel Mortgage. The security instrument required Kearney to obtain the creditor’s consent prior to disposal of the encumbered collateral. Appellants are the heirs of Donald E. Morgan and recipients of the rights and interests of the subject instruments. The trial court entered final summary judgment against Kearney based on findings that he had disposed of much of the collateral described in the Security Agreement, without consent and in default of its terms and that the sum then owed appellants, including interest, was $93,085.20. The trial court also ordered a public sale of the undisposed of collateral. Appellants purchased the remaining collateral at the foreclosure sale on a bid of $16,000 and subsequently sold it to a third party for $20,000.
There was no record made of the hearing upon appellants’ motion for deficiency judgment and the trial court’s orders are devoid of any finding of fact or specificity of grounds for denial.
On November 18, 1980, we ordered the parties to prepare a statement of evidence of the deficiency proceedings and the trial court to enter an order of settlement and approval within thirty days in accordance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)(3). In response to our order each party prepared a statement, and the two were in utter conflict.
Rather than comply with our order, the trial judge took no action on the statements. Thereafter the trial judge resigned from office on January 31, 1981, without having taken any action.
We are left, therefore, without any usable record of the proceedings of the deficiency hearing. In the absence of such record, we have no alternative but to affirm. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979).
AFFIRMED.
ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Clayton v. Ruthe Lee Clayton, 442 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…l flaw in appellant’s case. See also Starks v. Starks, 423 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (stipulated statement signed by counsel for both parties was deficient, and therefore not a sufficient substitute for a hearing transcript); Morgan v. Kearney, 395 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (record insufficient where trial judge resigned without taking action on conflicting statements of evidence prepared by the parties); Kauffmann v. Baker, 392 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (record insufficient where trial court di…
-
Grady v. Dep't OF Prof'l Reg., 402 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…ican/National Airlines, Inc., 392 So. 2d 920 (Fla.3d DCA 1980). We therefore have no alternative but to accept the Board’s decision that the definition of cosmetology actually includes appellant’s activities as an esthetician. See Morgan v. Kearney, 395 So. 2d 570 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). Appellant has also raised certain constitutional challenges to the Board’s licensing and testing procedures under chapter 477, asserting insufficient testing standards and an improper delegation of power to the Board. This cour…
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)