MARIANNE HOLM, APPELLANT,
v.
SUN BANK/BROWARD, N.A., F/K/A SUN BANK OF BROWARD COUNTY, N.A., 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.
A party cannot use an assignment of a mortgage as a shield to avoid liability for its own fraudulent misrepresentations made prior to the assignment.
Appellant executed a note and mortgage to appellee. Appellee assigned the mortgage to a third party. Appellant filed a third-party complaint alleging …
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 Motion To Dismiss Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
DELL, Judge.
In a mortgage foreclosure action, Marianne Holm appeals the dismissal of her third-party complaint against appellee, Sun Bank/Broward, N.A. Appellant executed a note and mortgage in favor of appellee. After the note was past due, appellee assigned the mortgage to Suburban Realties, Limited, without recourse. Suburban Realties filed a complaint to foreclose the mortgage against appellant. Appellant filed her answer and a third-party complaint, charging that appellee had fraudulently induced her to execute the mortgage by misrepresenting that the mortgage was a mere technicality which would not place her property in any risk of loss through foreclosure. Appellee moved to dismiss the third-party complaint and argued that, even if appellant had a cause of action for misrepresentation, because of the assignment of the mortgage the cause of action now ran only against Suburban Realties. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss and this appeal followed.
We agree with appellant’s contention that appellee’s assignment of the mortgage may not be used as a shield to insulate appellee from liability for its own tortious conduct. We find no merit in appellee’s argument that its assignment of the note and mortgage transferred liability for any such misrepresentations to the assignee, Suburban Realties.
The trial court, in passing on a motion to dismiss, must assume that all facts alleged in the complaint are true, Hammonds v. Buckeye Cellulose Corporation, 285 So. 2d 7, 11 (Fla.1973), and must decide the motion to dismiss only on questions of law, Kest v. Nathanson, 216 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). Appellant alleged sufficient ultimate facts to state a cause of action for fraudulent misrepresentation.
Accordingly, we reverse the order dismissing the third-party complaint and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
LETTS, C.J., and HERSEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Atl. Nat'l Bank OF Fla. v. Vest, 480 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…ts have held that a jury could reasonably so conclude, it is generally possible to identify a benefit flowing to the bank as a result of the breach. Hooper v. Barnett Bank of West Florida, 474 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 1985); Holm v. Sun Bank/Broward, N.A., 423 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); First Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n of Hamilton v. Caudle, 425 So. 2d 1050 (Ala.1983); Stone v. Davis, 66 Ohio St.2d 74, 419 N.E. 2d 1094, cert, denied, 454 U.S. 1081, 102 S.Ct. 634, 70 L.Ed.2d 614 (1981). The procurement of a be…
-
Francois Lazare v. Weiss, 437 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…fforded the defendant an opportunity to be heard on the issue of whether his failure to appear at his scheduled depositions was willful. See Kuechenberg v. Creative Interiors, Inc., 424 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Holm v. Sun Bank/Broward, N.A., 423 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Lewis, 260 So. 2d 221. Accordingly, the judgment under review is reversed and the cause remanded for the purpose of conducting an evidentiary hearing on this issue after notice to Lazare. Should the trial…
Authorities Cited
- Kest v. Nathanson, 216 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)
- Hammonds v. Buckeye Cellulose Corp., 285 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1973)