LPP MORTGAGE LTD., F/K/A LOAN PARTICIPANT PARTNERS, LTD., ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
BARBARA J. TUCKER, 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.
LPP Mortgage, as assignee of SBA mortgage loans, appealed a summary judgment dismissing its foreclosure action as time-barred. The court reversed, holding that as an assignee of a federal agency, LPP acquired the federal government's unlimited statute of limitations for foreclosure actions under 28 U.S.C. § 2415.
As an assignee of a federal agency's mortgage, LPP acquired the benefit of the federal government's unlimited statute of limitations for foreclosure actions. Thus, LPP was not time-barred from bringing the foreclosure action, and the trial court erred in applying a six-year statute of limitations.
[1] An assignee of a mortgage acquires the rights and benefits available to the assignor, including the benefit of the statute of limitations applicable to the assignor's for…
[2] The federal government has an unlimited time to bring an action to establish title to or right of possession of real or personal property, including the right to foreclos…
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“An assignee of a mortgage acquires the rights and benefits which are available to the assignor [...] This includes the benefit of the statute of limitations applicable to the assignor's foreclosure action.”
Establishes the core principle that assigns acquire their assignor's statutory limitations periods.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe SBA made mortgage loans to certain companies, and Tucker executed guaranty agreements on those loans. When the borrowers defaulted, LPP (which had…
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 Assignee Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
On Motion for Reheating
Upon consideration, we grant appellant’s motion for rehearing, withdraw our prior opinion dated June 23, 2010, and substitute the following:
LPP Mortgage LTD., etc. (“LPP”) appeals an adverse final summary judgment entered in favor of Barbara J. Tucker (“Tucker”). We reverse.
The Small Business Association (“SBA”) made mortgage loans to certain companies. Tucker executed guaranty agreements on the loans. Subsequently, LPP succeeded to the SBA mortgage. When the borrowers defaulted, LPP filed a foreclosure action against Tucker’s property. The trial court entered final summary judgment in favor of Tucker on the ground that the statute of limitations expired before the action was filed.
On appeal, LPP asserts that the trial court erred in applying a six-year statute of limitations to this foreclosure action. On the other hand, Tucker contends that the trial court applied the correct statute of limitations. We agree with LPP.
A statute of limitations is a procedural statute that prevents the enforcement of a cause of action that has accrued. See Houck Corp. v. New River, Ltd., Pasco, 900 So.2d 601, 603 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). An assignee of a mortgage acquires the rights and benefits which are available to the assignor. See, e.g., U.S. Nat’l Assoc. v. Taylor, 30 So.3d 530, 532 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010). This includes the benefit of the statute of limitations applicable to the assignor’s foreclosure action. See UMLIC VP LLC v. Matthias, 364 F.3d 125 (3d Cir.2004); LPP Mortgage Ltd. v. Hotaling, 497 F.Supp.2d 1217 (D.Colo.2007); LLP Mortgage Ltd. v. Cravero, 851 So.2d 897 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).
*117The United States Code provides an unlimited time for the federal government to bring an action to establish the title to, or right of possession of, real or personal property. See 28 U.S.C. § 2415 (1996). Thus, the courts have determined that the federal government may file to foreclose on mortgaged property at any time. See, e.g., United States v. Thornburg, 82 F.3d 886, 894 (9th Cir.1996) (“Congress has left no gap in the law concerning the right of the United States to foreclose on a mortgage without being subject to a limitation period.”)
Here, as assignee of a federal government agency, LPP acquired the benefit of the federal government’s unlimited time to foreclose on the mortgaged property. Thus, the trial court erred in finding that LPP was time barred for bringing this foreclosure action against Tucker’s property-
Accordingly, we reverse the final summary judgment, and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
RAMIREZ, C.J., and GERSTEN, J., concur.
(dissenting).
I dissent and would adhere to the panel opinion of June 23, 2010.
SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge,
(dissenting).
I dissent and would adhere to the panel opinion of June 23, 2010.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Houck Corp. v. NEW River, Ltd., 900 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- LLP Mortg. Ltd. v. Cravero, 851 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Crawford v. City Nat'l Bank & Westport Recovery Corp., 851 So. 2d 897 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
- U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Taylor, 30 So. 3d 530 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)