WILLIAM H. MUNTZING, III, APPELLANT,
v.
GLOBAL DISCOVERIES LTD., LLC, 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.
Muntzing appeals from summary judgment entered in favor of Global Discoveries, which sought to establish its entitlement to excess proceeds from a tax deed sale of Muntzing's property. The court affirmed, holding that Global's mortgage and assignment of rights, combined with a notarized statement of claim, established Global's valid lien without requiring submission of the underlying promissory note.
Global was not required to submit the promissory note. By submitting evidence that it was the assignee of the senior mortgagee and that it had submitted a notarized statement of claim to the Clerk, Global established its entitlement to the excess proceeds as a matter of law.
[1] A mortgage itself constitutes a lien on the property, and a separate promissory note is not necessarily required to establish the existence of the lien for purposes of cl…
[2] Assignment of a senior mortgagee's right to excess proceeds from a tax deed sale, coupled with submission of a notarized statement of claim to the Clerk of Court, is suff…
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“A mortgage by definition is a written instrument providing security for performance of a duty or payment of a debt which, when recorded, gives rise to a lien on the mortgaged property.”
Establishes that the mortgage itself constitutes the lien, not the promissory note
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMuntzing failed to pay property taxes on his Osceola County property, resulting in a tax deed sale. Regions Bank, which held a mortgage on the propert…
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 Statement Of Claim cases and more on FLexlaw
William H. Muntzing, III (“Muntzing”), appeals from the trial court’s entry of final summary judgment in favor of Global Discoveries Ltd., LLC (“Global”), in Global’s action to establish its entitlement to the excess proceeds from the tax deed sale of Muntzing’s property. Muntzing raises several issues on appeal, only one of which merits discussion. He argues summary judgment was improper because a disputed material fact existed as to whether Global had a valid lien on the property.1 We disagree and affirm.
Due to Muntzing’s failure to pay property taxes, his Osceola County property was sold at a tax deed' sale. Regions Bank, which held a mortgage on the property, subsequently assigned to Global its right to the excess proceeds from the sale. Seeking distribution of those proceeds, Global submitted to the Osceola County Clerk of the Circuit Court á notarized statement of claim setting forth the amount due and owing under the mortgage. For reasons' not relevant to this appeal, the Clerk refused to release the excess proceeds to Global, prompting Global to file suit seeking to establish its right to the funds.
Global thereafter moved for summary judgment, submitting as evidence the mortgage on Muntzing’s property, the mortgagee’s assignment of its right to the excess proceeds to Global, and the notarized statement of claim. In opposing the motion, Muntzing submitted a sworn affidavit stating that Global had not offered as evidence the promissory note underlying the mortgage. After a hearing, the trial court entered summary judgment, finding that Global had established its right to the proceeds.
On appeal, Muntzing reasserts his position below that Global was required to submit the promissory note to establish it had a valid lien. We disagree. The mortgage itself constituted the lien on the property. See Gonzalez v. NAFH Nat'l Bank, 93 So.3d 1054, 1058 n. 2 (Fla; 3d DCA 2012) (“A mortgage by definition is a written instrument providing security for performance of a duty or payment of a debt *692which, when recorded, gives rise to a lien on the mortgaged property.” (quotation omitted)). By submitting evidence that it was the assignee of the senior mortgagee and that it had submitted a statement of claim to the Clerk, Global established its entitlement to the excess proceeds as a matter of law. See §§ 197.'502(4), 197.522(l)(a), 197.582(2), Fla. Stat. (2012); Fla. Admin.Code R. 12D-13.065(3) (“Any valid lien in the property is entitled to payment before any payment is made to the titleholder of record.”); Fla. Admin. Code R. 12D-13.065(4) (providing that party seeking distribution of excess proceeds must submit notarized statement of claim to the Clerk of the Court, setting forth “the particulars of [the] lien, and the amounts currently due.... ”); Fla. Admin. Code R. 12D-13.065(6) (providing statements of claim are to be paid according to priorities of recordation). Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
PALMER and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Keech v. Sultan Yousef, 815 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Gonzalez v. Nafh Nat'l Bank, 93 So. 3d 1054 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)