WILLIAM A. NESBITT, APPELLANT,
v.
CITICORP SAVINGS OF FLORIDA, A FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1987-09-01
No. 86-1381
Before HENDRY, NESBITT and FERGUSON, JJ.
514 So. 2d 371 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1987) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Although usury in the underlying obligation is a valid defense to a mortgage foreclosure, the defense is not available to a subsequent owner of the property who is not a party to the allegedly usurious contract and who took the encumbered property subject to the mortgage. Spinney v. Winter Park Bldg. & Loan Ass’n., 120 Fla. 458, 162 So. 899 (1935); Zimmerman v. Hill, 100 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958). Nothing in the usury statutes, chapter 687, Florida Statutes (1985), supports the argument of the appellants that the controlling cases have been legislatively overruled.

We affirm the final judgment of foreclosure.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Eurovest, Ltd. v. Segall, 528 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
    …validity of the mortgage. See Spinney v. Winter Park Bldg. & Loan Ass’n, 120 Fla. 453, 162 So. 899 (1935) (defense of usury to mortgage foreclosure is not available to subsequent owner taking property subject to mortgage); Nesbitt v. Citicorp Sav., 514 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (same). A subsequent purchaser may not defend against a preexisting mortgage lien on grounds which would be unavailable to him had he assumed payment of the mortgage. Spinney, 162 So. at 903. Accordingly, Se-gall, as subsequent pu…
  • Blaine v. Marmor, 555 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
    …[*1242] PER CURIAM. As the record shows that appellant is a stranger to the note as to which he seeks to recover allegedly usurious payments, dismissal of plaintiff’s action is affirmed. See Nesbitt v. Citicorp Savings, 514 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Affirmed.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw