CARLSON
v.
BECKER
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.
In this mortgage foreclosure deficiency case, the Florida Supreme Court reversed a trial court's discretionary reduction of the deficiency award from $5,246.23 to $1,000, holding that such discretion must be grounded in established equitable principles and cannot be exercised arbitrarily without explanation.
The court held that while granting a deficiency decree is discretionary, this discretion must be a 'sound judicial discretion' supported by established equitable principles applicable to the case facts, and must be reviewable on appeal. The record failed to show sufficient facts justifying the reduction, so the case was remanded.
[1] A trial court's discretion to award a deficiency decree in mortgage foreclosure is not absolute but must be exercised as a sound judicial discretion supported by establis…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“While ordinarily the granting of a deficiency decree is discretionary with the court, this is not an absolute and unbridled discretion, but a "sound judicial discretion," which must be supported by established equitable principles as applied to the facts of the case, and the exercise of which is subject to review on appeal.”
Establishes the legal standard that discretion in deficiency decrees must be grounded in equitable principles and is reviewable on appeal, not arbitrary.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiffs obtained a final decree in a mortgage foreclosure suit. The mortgaged property was sold at public auction for $630, resulting in a deficien…
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 Judicial Discretion In Equity cases and more on FLexlaw
H.V. Whitehurst, Miami, for appellees. ROBERTS, Judge.
This appeal brings for review a deficiency decree entered by the court below in a mortgage foreclosure suit.
After a final decree in plaintiffs' favor was entered, the mortgaged property was sold at public auction for the sum of $630, and the Special Master found a deficiency due and owing to plaintiffs in the amount of $5,246.23. The plaintiffs were not the purchasers at the Special Master's Sale.
Thereafter, the Chancellor entered a deficiency decree in which he found that $5,246.23 remained due and owing to plaintiffs, but that they were entitled to a deficiency decree in the amount of $1,000, only. The Chancellor did not assign a reason for awarding the plaintiffs a sum less than that actually due and owing to them.
While ordinarily the granting of a deficiency decree is discretionary with the court, this is not an absolute and unbridled discretion, but a "sound judicial discretion," which must be supported by established equitable principles as applied to the facts of the case, and the exercise of which is subject to review on appeal. Cragin v. Ocean & Lake Realty Co., 101 Fla. 1324, 133 So. 569, 573, 135 So. 795; Taylor v. Prine, 101 Fla. 967, 132 So. 464.
We are of the opinion that the record in this case fails to show sufficient facts and circumstances to justify the Chancellor *117 in awarding to plaintiffs a lesser amount than that found to be due and owing to them.
The cause is, therefore, remanded, with directions to the Chancellor to modify the deficiency decree in accordance with the opinion herein.
The request for additional attorney's fees is denied.
ADAMS, C.J., TERRELL and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (30 total)
-
Carlson v. Becker, 45 So.2d 116 (Fla. 1950)…45 So. 2d 116 (1950) CARLSON et ux. v. BECKER et al. Supreme Court of Florida, Division A. March 10, 1950. Fogle, Kirtley, Connelly & Fordham, Miami, for appellants. H.V. Whitehurst, Miami, for appellees. ROBERTS, Judge. This appeal brings for review a defici…
-
Kurkjian v. Fish Carburetor Corp., 145 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)…113 Fla. 81, 151 So. 539 (1933). . Cole v. Heidt, 117 Fla. 756, 158 So. 435 (1935). . 19 Fla.Jur., Judgments & Decrees, § 307 and cases cited therein. . Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Moscovitz, 119 Fla. 708, 161 So. 80 (1935). . Carlson v. Becker, 45 So. 2d 116 (Fla.1950).…
-
Norwest Bank Owatonna, N.A. v. Millard, 522 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…market value of the property was $64,000 and prayed for a deficiency of $161,931.63. However, the trial court granted a deficiency of only $47,210.43 and Norwest appealed. The rule is well established in Florida and set forth in Carlson v. Becker, 45 So. 2d 116, 116 (Fla.1950), that: While ordinarily the granting of a deficiency decree is discretionary with the court, this is not an absolute and unbridled discretion, but a “sound judicial discretion,” which must be supported by established equitable princ…
Previewing 3 of 30 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Cragin v. Ocean & Lake Realty Co., 133 So. 569 (Fla. 1931)
- Taylor v. Prine, 101 Fla. 967 (Fla. 1931)
- Carlson v. Becker, 45 So.2d 116 (Fla. 1950)