COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
SOOK HYUNG KIM, UNKNOWN SPOUSE OF SOOK HYUNG KIM, SOOK HYUNG KIM, UNKNOWN TENANT I, UNKNOWN TENANT II, PINE BAY HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC., MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., ACTING SOLELY AS NOMINEE FOR AEGIS MORTGAGE CORPORATION D/B/A NEW AMERICA, LTD., CAPITAL ONE, F.S.B., AND ANY UNKNOWN HEIRS, DEVISEES, GRANTEES, CREDITORS, AND OTHER UNKNOWN PERSONS OR UNKNOWN SPOUSES CLAIMING BY, THROUGH AND UNDER ANY OF THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANTS, 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.
Countrywide initiated a mortgage foreclosure against a property owner whose predecessors had executed a mortgage but inadvertently failed to obtain the wife's signature. The trial court voided the mortgage as a matter of law, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the mortgage was valid despite the missing signature where the wife had knowledge and assent to the transaction.
The mortgage is not void. Despite the wife's missing signature, the mortgage is valid because the wife signed with knowledge and assent to the transaction, and the failure to obtain her signature was solely due to inadvertence rather than lack of consent.
[1] A mortgage is not void as a matter of law when one spouse, who owned the property as a tenant by the entirety, fails to sign the mortgage, especially when the failure to…
[2] A court may reform a mortgage to correct a missing signature when the failure to obtain the signature was due to inadvertence and the non-signing party had knowledge of a…
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“Because Countrywide had inadvertently failed to obtain the wife's signature on the mortgage, the trial court held that the mortgage was void as a matter of law. We reverse.”
Establishes the central issue and the court's ultimate holding reversing the trial court's judgment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMichael and Tricia Abdulahad owned property as tenants by the entirety and executed a mortgage with Countrywide, but only Michael signed the mortgage …
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 Tenants By The Entireties cases and more on FLexlaw
KLEIN, J.
Countrywide initiated this mortgage foreclosure against Kim, asserting that the prior owners, a married couple, had executed a mortgage in favor of Countrywide which was in default. Because Countrywide had inadvertently failed to obtain the wife’s signature on the mortgage, the trial court held that the mortgage was void as a matter of law. We reverse.
The owners of the property prior to Kim were Michael and Tricia Abdulahad, husband and wife. The facts as reflected by the record, when the trial court entered this summary judgment, showed that when the mortgage was executed, the property was owned by Michael and Tricia, as tenants by the entirety, but the mortgage was signed only by Michael. The fact that Tricia had not signed the mortgage was due solely to inadvertence, as she attended the closing, knew that the proceeds of the mortgage were being used to pay for the property, and would have signed the mortgage if requested to do so. She assumed the mortgage would be paid from the proceeds of the sale to Kim.
When Kim purchased from Michael and Tricia, through further inadvertence, the mortgage to Countrywide was not paid off or satisfied and, when it went into default, Countrywide filed this foreclosure suit.
Countrywide relies on Schmidt v. Matilsky, 490 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) to support its argument that the mortgage is valid even though Tricia neglected to sign it. In Schmidt the husband signed an option to sell land in the presence of his wife, and the court upheld the option against the wife, who had not signed, because her husband signed with her knowledge and assent. Accord, Douglass v. Jones, 422 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (wife did not acquiesce). See also Smith v. Royal Auto. Group, 675 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (missing signature to a contract can be supplied by the courts through reformation); Spear v. MacDonald, 67 So. 2d 630 (Fla.1953) (reformation should be applied to correct deed and mortgage containing wrong legal description due to surveyor’s errors).
This mortgage is accordingly not void, and the summary judgment is reversed.
GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Spikes v. Onewest Bank FSB, 106 So. 3d 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…d the loan closing, knew the proceeds of the mortgage were being used to pay for the property, and would have signed the mortgage if requested to do so, does not preclude foreclosure of the mortgage upon default. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. v. Kim, 898 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). However, since the holding of Kim was not addressed, we proceed with reviewing what was decided by the trial court. On appeal, the Spikes argue that because neither of them engaged in fraudulent or egregious conduct, the imposi…
-
Aissa Gonzalez v. U.S. Bank Tr. Nat'l Ass'n, 237 So. 3d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Spikes v. OneWest Bank FSB, 106 So. 3d 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) ; Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. v. Kim, 898 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).…
-
Brown v. Towd Point Mortg. Tr. 2017-6 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Spear v. MacDONALD, 67 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 1953)
- Smith v. Royal Auto. Grp., Inc., 675 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Douglass v. Jones, 422 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Ricks v. State, 490 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Jule E. Schmidt and Ann L. Schmidt v. Matilsky, 490 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)