BANK OF AMERICA, APPELLANT,
v.
FRANCOIS CLAUDE CADET, 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.
Bank of America appeals the dismissal of its foreclosure action against Cadet for failure to strictly comply with paragraph 22 of the mortgage. The court reverses, holding that substantial compliance with contractual conditions precedent, rather than strict compliance, is the applicable standard under Florida law.
The court holds that substantial compliance with contractual conditions precedent, not strict compliance, is required under Florida law and ordinary contract principles. The Bank's default notice substantially complied with paragraph 22 by informing Cadet of the default, the cure amount, and the foreclosure consequences.
[1] A trial court errs by requiring strict compliance with contractual conditions precedent to foreclosure when substantial compliance is sufficient under Florida law.
[2] A default notice in a mortgage foreclosure action substantially complies with contractual requirements if it informs the borrower of the default, the action required to c…
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“we interpreted the default notice provision in paragraph 22 of the mortgage in accordance with ordinary contract principles and Florida law, which evaluates adherence to contractual conditions precedent for substantial compliance or performance”
Establishes the governing legal standard that substantial compliance, not strict compliance, applies to mortgage conditions precedent
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCadet stopped making mortgage payments in March 2008. Bank of America sent a default notice informing Cadet of his default, the required payment of $9…
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 Strict Compliance cases and more on FLexlaw
Bank of America (“the Bank”) appeals the trial court's order involuntarily' dismissing the Bank’s foreclosure action filed against Francois Claude Cadet (“Cadet”) based on the Bank’s failure “to strictly comply with paragraph 22 of the mortgage ...Paragraph 22 of Cadet’s mortgage sets forth several conditions precedent to the filing óf a foreclosure action. Based on this Court’s opinion in Bank of New York Mellon v. Nunez, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D2486, 180 So.3d 160, (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 4,2015), we reverse.1
In sum, we interpreted the default notice provision in paragraph 22 of the mortgage in accordance with ordinary contract principles and Florida law, which evaluates adherence to contractual conditions precedent for substantial compliance or performance, Nunez, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D2486, 2015 WL 6735856 at *2, not strict compliance as the trial court found was required in the instant case. We note that in the instant case, just as in the Nunez case, relevant to the trial court’s order, the Bank’s default notice informed Cadet that he was in default for failing to make the required payments (Cadet has not made his mortgage payments since March of 2008); the action required to cure the default (payment of $9,800.20 already due on orbefore June 4, 2008, plus any additional payments, late charges, fees and charges, which become due on or before June 4, 2008); and if he failed to cure the default by June 4, 2008, the mortgage payrnents would be accelerated and a foreclosure action would be initiated which could result in the foreclosure and sale of Cadet’s property.
Because the default notice substantially complied with paragraph 22 of Cadet’s mortgage, we reverse the order under review and remand for further proceedings. For a more complete analysis of the law on this issue, please see Nunez.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bank OF NEW York v. Luisa E. Mieses, 187 So. 3d 919 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…judgment and holding, on appellee’s confession of error, that the language of the default notice (containing identical language to that in the instant case) substantially complied with paragraph twenty-two of the mortgage); Bank of America v. Cadet, 183 So. 3d 477, 478 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Bank of New York Mellon v. Johnson, 185 So. 3d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016); Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Milam, 177 So. 3d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).1 Accordingly, because we find, as in Nunez, that the default notice substantially…
-
U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Doepker, 223 So. 3d 1083 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…nt due including “any payments or other charges that become , due under the note and mortgage between the date of the letter and the date of the satisfying payment,” and a date to cure substantially complied with paragraph 22); Bank of Am. v. Cadet, 183 So. 3d 477, 478 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (holding that a breach letter that notified the recipient of the default, specified an amount due to cure that included “any additional payments, late charges, fees and charges which became due,” and provided a deadline for p…
-
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Hernandez & Silva Enters., Inc., 193 So. 3d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…ice is sufficient if it substantially com [*68] plies with the mortgage’s default notice provision. Bank of N.Y. v. Mieses, 187 So. 3d 919 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); SunTrust Mortg., Inc. v. Garcia, 186 So. 3d 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Bank of Am. v. Cadet, 183 So. 3d 477, 478 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (Mem); Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Nunez, 180 So. 3d 160, 162 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). The trial court applied a strict compliance standard in the instant case.1 Reversed and remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bank OF NEW York Mellon v. Nunez, 180 So. 3d 160 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)