MARK HURWITZ, LARRY HOWITT, AND FIRST GENERAL MORTGAGE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
ALAN I. FRANK, ET AL., INTERCOASTAL TITLE SERVICES, INC., AND MANOR TITLE, INC., 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.
Appellants, assignees of a mortgage, appealed a trial court judgment finding them entitled to damages of $7,456 for negligence by title company defendants but denying prejudgment interest. The court reversed in part and remanded solely to award prejudgment interest, while affirming the damage award despite appellants' failure to provide a trial transcript.
The trial court's finding regarding duties and negligence is affirmed due to appellants' failure to provide a trial transcript, but the judgment is reversed and remanded solely to award prejudgment interest on the liquidated damages from the settlement date of November 1, 1984.
[1] An appellate court presumes the correctness of a trial court's decision, and the absence of a trial transcript prevents an appellant from demonstrating error.
[2] In a negligence action, the absence of a trial transcript prevents an appellant from demonstrating that the trial court erred in its findings.
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“The trial court's decision arrives at this court with a presumption of correctness, and without a record of the proceedings held below, appellants are unable to demonstrate that the trial court erred in finding as it did.”
Establishes that failure to provide trial transcript prevents appellate review of trial court findings of fact and duty determinations.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFrank executed two mortgages in connection with a home purchase: one purchase money mortgage with Manor Title as closing agent, and another with First…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Trial Court Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
POLEN, Judge.
This appeal arises out of mortgage foreclosure proceedings. Appellants are the assignees of one of two mortgages appellee Frank executed in connection with the purchase of a home. One mortgage was a purchase money mortgage closed by appel-lee Manor Title, Inc., a/k/a Town Title, Inc. The other mortgage was executed in favor of appellant First General Mortgage Company, Inc., and later assigned to appellants. First General had hired Intercoastal Title Services, Inc., to act as closing agent and title examiner. Apparently Frank failed to make mortgage payments and a dispute arose as to the priority of the mortgages. Appellants eventually entered into a settlement with the other mortgagees, and subsequently brought suit against Intercoastal for negligence in conducting its duties as a closing agent and title examiner, and for allowing a disbursal of the mortgage proceeds to Frank. Appellants also sued Manor Title for negligently conducting its closing.
On appeal, appellants urge reversal of the trial court’s final judgment in that the court found that Manor Title owed no duty to appellants, that First General and Inter-coastal were both negligent, and that total damages were $7,456.00. However, appellants have failed to provide this court with a transcript of the proceedings before the trial court. The trial court’s decision arrives at this court with a presumption of correctness, and without a record of the proceedings held below, appellants are unable to demonstrate that the trial court erred in finding as it did. Applegate v. Barnett Bank, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979). This is particularly true in a negligence action such as the instant case.
We are able to address appellants’ second point on appeal, notwithstanding the lack of a trial transcript. We agree that the trial court erred in failing to award prejudgment interest, as the final judgment liquidates damages from the date that the settlement was reached: November 1, 1984. Argonaut Ins. Co. v. May Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla.1985). Therefore, we reverse and remand the final judgment, solely for the purpose of awarding prejudgment interest.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, and REMANDED.
GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and ANSTEAD, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Argonaut Ins. Co. v. MAY Plumbing Co., 474 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 1985)