AGUSTIN FEBRES CORDERO, INDIVIDUALLY, OLD CUTLER BAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, A DISSOLVED FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
CAPITAL BANK, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, NEXT DEVELOPMENT, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, SOMERSET HOLDING COMPANY, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, MIAMI BAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND RAUL PLANAS, INDIVIDUALLY, JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY, 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.
The court reversed the dismissal of a damage action against Capital Bank, holding that plaintiffs' claims were not compulsory counterclaims that should have been raised in a prior mortgage foreclosure action because the claims involved distinct facts and legal issues under the logical relationship test.
Claims arising from alleged wrongful conduct by a bank are not compulsory counterclaims in a prior mortgage foreclosure action when they involve distinct facts and legal issues separate from the foreclosure liability.
[1] Under the logical relationship test, claims for wrongful conduct by a lender are not compulsory counterclaims in a mortgage foreclosure action when the claims involve dis…
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 intelligenceAgustín Cordero and Old Cutler Bay Development Corporation filed a damage action against Capital Bank and others following a prior mortgage foreclosur…
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 Logical Relationship Test cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the order dismissing the second amended complaint entered in a damage action filed by Agustín Cordero and Old Cutler Bay Development Corporation against Capital Bank. Under the “logical relationship test” set forth in Londono v. Turkey Creek, Inc., 609 So. 2d 14, 20 (Fla.1992), the claims presently asserted by plaintiffs are not compulsory counterclaims that should have been raised in the prior mortgage foreclosure action. Although both actions involve business dealings with Capital and Old Cutler and there is some overlap in the events, the basis of both claims is not the same aggregate of operative facts, and the aggregate core of facts supporting the initial foreclosure action does not activate the requisite additional legal rights. The foreclosure action concerning Old Cutler’s liability under the mortgage and the presently asserted claims as to Capital’s wrongful conduct involve distinct facts and legal issues.
Accordingly, we reverse the dismissal order. See Whigum v. Heilig-Meyers Furniture, Inc., 682 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Peterson v. United Accounts, Inc., 638 F. 2d 1134 (8th Cir.1981). Cf. Norris v. Paps, 615 So. 2d 735, 737 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)(fraud in the inducement of a note or mortgage is generally a compulsory counterclaim in a foreclosure action); Key Credit, Inc. v. Espirito Santo Bank of Fla., 610 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)(same).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Garcia v. State, 721 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…trial court erred in admitting into evidence the cocaine contraband where there was a substantial weight discrepancy between the weight of the cocaine recovered by police officers and that introduced into evidence. As stated in Cridland v. State, 693 So. 2d 720 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), relevant physical evidence is admissible unless there is some indication of probable tampering with the evidence. Here, the cocaine turned in by arresting Officer Jacobson was identified as 10.5 grams. “[T]he envelope, the pill c…
Authorities Cited
- Javier H. Londono, M.D. v. Turkey Creek, Inc., 609 So. 2d 14 (Fla. 1992)
- Norris v. Paps, 615 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Perez v. Sherrie D. Byrd, 682 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Momplaisir v. J.C. Penney Co., Inc., 610 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Peterson v. United Accounts, Inc., 638 F.2d 1134 (8th Cir. 1981)