GE CAPITAL MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
MAGUY CANALES, ET AL., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mortgage Foreclosure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
GE Capital Mortgage Services, Inc. [GE] appeals an order of the trial court which was entered on GE’s motion for summary judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action against Maguy Canales, et al. At first blush, it appears that the order is a non-appealable, non-final order denying GE’s motion for summary judgment. A closer examination reveals, however, that the trial court went on to deny the acceleration request and to alter the terms of the mortgage notwithstanding the total absence of any defense put forward by the appellees. One can certainly understand the trial judge’s desire to avoid presenting the appellees with a misfortune in addition to the ones that appear to have befallen them. However, the law which we must follow is clear: in the absence of any valid defense the trial court cannot refuse to enforce the terms of a note and mortgage. David v. Sun Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 461 So. 2d 93 (Fla.1984).
Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent herewith.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pricewaterhousecoopers LLP v. Cedar Res., Inc., 761 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…or Orange County. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.060(b). . The concept of nexus is relevant when the trial court is considering a motion to transfer venue on forum non conveniens grounds under section 47.122, Florida Statutes (1997), see Sullivan v. Klein, 691 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), or when the trial court is considering whether a corporation transacts business in a particular county for venue purposes under section 47.051, Florida Statutes (1997), see U-Haul Co. of Northern Fla. v. Fuller, 417 So. 2d 1102 (…
-
Romilio F. Marques, M.D. v. Garcia, 245 So. 3d 900 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…'] lawyer has an office in Polk County," before reversing the trial court and directing it to grant the defendants' motion for change of venue to Lake County (where the majority of the witnesses and the plaintiffs lived). See also Sullivan v. Klein, 691 So. 2d 21, 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) ("the only connection to Dade County is the plaintiff's attorney," reversing denial of a motion to transfer venue).…
-
Morrill v. Lytle, 893 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…r accident occurs in a Florida county other than the forum county and the witnesses are located outside of the forum county and many or most of the witnesses are ■ located in the county in which the accident occurred. ' See, e.g., Sullivan v. Klein, 691 So. 2d 21, 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)(trial court abused its discretion in denying transfer from Dade County to Pinellas County where accident occurred in Pinellas and there were potential Pinel-las witnesses “albeit nominal,” whereas plaintiffs attorney was only…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- David v. SUN Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 461 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1984)