EULALIA BALAGUER AND JUAN H. BALAGUER, APPELLANTS,
v.
CHASE HOME FINANCE, 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.
The Balaguers appealed a dismissal of their action to quiet title and declare their mortgage null and void, arguing the debt was uncollectable due to the statute of limitations and therefore the mortgage lien should be voided. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that a mortgage lien remains enforceable for five years after the maturity date of the secured obligation, regardless of whether a prior foreclosure action was dismissed.
The mortgage lien remains in effect until five years after the maturity date of the obligation, regardless of whether a prior foreclosure action was dismissed or whether the statute of limitations bars collection on the underlying debt. The lien is not nullified merely because the debt becomes uncollectable.
[1] A lender is not precluded from collecting on a defaulted promissory note where a prior foreclosure action accelerating payment on a default has been dismissed.
[2] Even where a lender is barred by the statute of limitations from pursuing foreclosure during the term of a loan, the lien imposed by the mortgage securing the still outst…
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 lender is not precluded from collecting on a defaulted promissory note where, as here, a prior foreclosure action accelerating payment on a default has been dismissed”
Establishes that dismissal of a prior foreclosure action does not prevent the lender from collecting on the underlying debt
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn May 2007, the Balaguers executed a mortgage securing a $416,800 promissory note with a maturity date of June 1, 2037. The bank filed a foreclosure …
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 Quiet Title cases and more on FLexlaw
Eulalia and Juan H. Balaguer appeal from an order dismissing their "action to quiet title and for declaratory relief, wherein they sought to have the mortgage they executed in May of 2007 as security for a $416,800 promissory note declared null and void and to have the property encumbered by it released from the lien imposed by that mortgage. "For thé following reasons, we affirm. " • • •
The record reflects that, oh January 29, 2008, the bank filed a complaint for foreclosure which contained an allegation exercising its contractual right to' accelerate' the entire debt for nonpayment áhd deciding the full amount due. Chase Home Fin., LLC v. Balaguer, Case No. 08-05648-CA-31. When the bank failed to appear at trial scheduled for February 14, 2011, the trial court dismissed the foreclosure action without prejudice. On March 18, 2013, the Balaguers filed the instant action to quiet title to the subject property, which is predicated on the assertion that the payments due under the -promissory note and the mortgage securing it were accelerated, but not foreclosed, inore than five years ago thereby not only making the debt uncollectable pursuant to the applicable statute of limitations1, but also-nullifying the mortgage lien securing it.
In Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. Beauvais, 188 So.3d 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (en banc), this court confirmed" that a lender is not precluded from collecting on a. defaulted promissory note where, as here, a" prior foreclosure action accelerating payment on a default has been dismissed. Nevertheless, even where a lender is barred by, the statute of limitations from pursuing foreclosure during the term of a loan — an issue which .is not currently before us — Beauvais also confirms that the lien imposed by the mortgage securing the still outstanding debt remains in effect until five years after the maturity date of the obligation. Id. (reversing “that portion of the trial court’s order which declared that the mortgage was null and void, canceled same, and quieted title to the property in favor of the Association”); see § 95.281(1)(a), Fla. Stat,.(2013) (providing that the “lien of a mortgage ... encumbering 'real property, herein called mortgage .shall terminate ... [i]f the final maturity of an obligation secured by a mortgage is ascertainable from the record of it, 5 years after the date of maturity”).2
For these reasons, the order, dismissing the instant action is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Americas v. Beauvais, 188 So. 3d 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)