MARIE A. SEPTIMUS AND VILNOR SEPTIMUS, APPELLANTS,
v.
CHRISTIANA TRUST, A DIVISION OF WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, AS TRUSTEE FOR NORMANDY MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST, SERIES 2013-18; JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION; COHEN VENTURES LLC; AND PALM BEACH PLANTATION HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC., 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 Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a final foreclosure judgment against homeowners Marie and Vilnor Septimus because the foreclosing bank failed to prove standing at the time the complaint was filed. The court held that a successor plaintiff cannot cure a predecessor's lack of standing by acquiring the note and mortgage after the lawsuit commenced.
The court reversed the foreclosure judgment because the bank failed to prove standing at the time the complaint was filed. A successor plaintiff acquires only the standing of its transferor and cannot cure the predecessor's lack of standing by acquiring documents after the lawsuit commences.
[1] A plaintiff must prove it had standing to foreclose at the time the complaint was filed.
[2] A plaintiff's lack of standing at the inception of a case cannot be cured by the acquisition of standing after the case is filed.
Previewing 2 of 6 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 plaintiff must prove it had standing to foreclose at the time the complaint was filed.”
Establishes the fundamental requirement that standing must exist at the inception of the lawsuit, citing McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat'l Ass'n.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMarie and Vilnor Septimus were homeowners in a foreclosure action brought by Christiana Trust and JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association. The bank w…
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 Standing To Foreclose cases and more on FLexlaw
Marie and Vilnor Septimus appeal a final judgment of foreclosure entered in favor of Christiana Trust, a division of Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee for Normandy Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 201318, and JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association (“the bank”). They contend, among other things, that the bank failed to prove standing. We agree and reverse.
A plaintiff must prove it had standing to foreclose at the time the complaint was filed. McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 79 So.3d 170, 173 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Furthermore, “the plaintiffs lack of standing at the inception of the case is not a defect that may be cured by the acquisition of standing after the case is filed.” Id. (quoting Progressive Exp. Ins. Co. v. McGrath Cmty. Chiropractic, 913 So.2d 1281, 1285 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)). Pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.260, a substituted plaintiff acquires the standing of the transferor original plaintiff. Brandenburg v. Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., 137 So.3d 604, 605 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); see also Kiefert v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, 153 So.3d 351, 353-54 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (reversing where successor plaintiff failed to establish that original plaintiff had standing to foreclose at the time the complaint was filed).
The bank, a successor plaintiff, failed to demonstrate that its predecessor had standing at the time the action was commenced. Although the bank eventually filed a blank-indorsed note, the note attached to the complaint did not contain the indorsement, and the bank points to no other evidence demonstrating standing at the time the complaint was filed. The bank asks this court to take judicial notice of the FDIC’s assignment of the note and mortgage to its predecessor before the complaint was filed. However, even if standing were demonstrated by the assignment, this evidence was not admitted at trial, and our judicial notice would not change the fact that the trial court erred in entering judgment for the bank where it did not prove standing.
Because we reverse due to lack of standing, any remaining issues such as proof of damages are moot.
Reversed.
GROSS and GERBER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- McLEAN v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 79 So. 3d 170 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
- Progressive Express Ins. Co. v. McGRATH Community Chiropractic, 913 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Daniel and Nancy Kiefert v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, 153 So. 3d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Clement C. Brandenburg and Louise Brandenburg v. Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., 137 So. 3d 604 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)