KENNETH FARAH, APPELLANT,
v.
IBERIA BANK, APPELLEE
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 held that the phrase 'for which let execution issue' is unauthorized in a final judgment of mortgage foreclosure and must be stricken.
The final judgment of mortgage foreclosure included the phrase 'for which let execution issue,' which is contrary to the prescribed Florida Supreme Co…
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 Deficiency Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
The final judgment of mortgage foreclosure on appeal unauthorizedly and contrary to Form 1.996, promulgated by the Florida Supreme Court for such actions, provides “for which let execution issue,” upon the amounts due on the underlying debt. As in American General Finance, Inc. v. Graves, 621 So.2d 585 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993),1 those words are stricken from the judgment under review, which is otherwise affirmed.
The effect and purpose of this ruling is to prevent the circumvention of the process required to establish the right to a deficiency judgment, which prominently includes a valuation of the mortgaged property. See Century Group, Inc. v. Premier Fin. Servs. East, L.P., 724 So.2d 661 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). In other words, we disapprove any effort — including those already undertaken by the appellee in this case— to reach the personal assets of the mortgagor until, unless, and only to the extent that a deficiency judgment is rendered after an appropriate exercise of the trial court’s discretion in accordance with applicable principles of law and equity. See Wilson v. Adams & Fusselle, Inc., 467 So.2d 345, 346 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), and cases cited therein; see also Fulton v. R.K. Cooper Constr. Co., 208 So.2d 863 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967), writ dismissed, 216 So.2d 11 (Fla.1968). Moreover, the trial court must also consider the claim that the appellee specifically waived the right to a deficiency in the proceedings below, in which case no such judgment may be entered. See Taylor v. Kenco Chem. & Mfg. Corp., 465 So.2d 581, 584 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Capital Bank v. Needle, 596 So.2d 1134, 1136 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Royal Palm Corporate Ctr. Ass'n, Ltd. v. Pugliese, III, 89 So. 3d 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…ocedure upheld by this Court in Klondike and the supreme court in Junction Bit & Tool Co., and it is consistent with the principle that an unsatisfied money judgment is no bar to a later foreclosure. Defendants rely heavily on Farah v. Iberia Bank, 47 So. 3d 850 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), to argue that PNC was limited to the deficiency process if it sought to obtain judgments beyond foreclosure. However, Farah is factually distinguishable. Though the opinion is light on facts,13 it appears that the Farah final jud…
-
Aluia v. Dyck-O'Neal, Inc., 205 So. 3d 768 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)…ment that, by its terms, accounted for the payments made under the note prior to default and orders the sale of the property; it is therefore not the same debt evidenced by the note. Cf. Royal Palm, 89 So. 3d at 933 (discussing Farah v. Iberia Bank, 47 So. 3d 850 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010), and distinguishing between money judgments and foreclosure judgments). The final judgment is a foreclosure decree and judgment, establishing an obligation independent of the mortgage and note.4 See TD Bank, 172 So. 3d at 553. Th…
-
Blue v. Covington Cnty. Bank, 77 So. 3d 909 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…ribunal. Caufield v. Cantele, 837 So. 2d 371, 375 (Fla.2002). In post-foreclosure proceedings to establish a deficiency judgment, the trial court must determine the value of property sold in satisfaction of the underlying debt. Farah v. Iberia Bank, 47 So. 3d 850 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (explaining that “the process required to establish the right to a deficiency judgment [ ] prominently includes a valuation of the mortgaged property”); Hatton v. Barnett Bank of Palm Beach County, 550 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…
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
- Taylor v. Kenco Chem. & MFG. Corp. & Emerald Mfg. Co., Inc., 465 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- R. K. Cooper Constr. Co. v. Fulton, 216 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 1968)
- Hampton Enters., Inc. v. Adelman, 596 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Cap. Bank v. Needle, 596 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Wilson v. Adams & Fusselle, Inc., 467 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Fulton v. R. K. Cooper Constr. Co., 208 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)
- Century Grp., Inc. v. Premier Fin. Servs. E., L.P., 724 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
- Burns v. State, 621 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)