EDWARD K. NEWMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed foreclosure judgment but reversed and remanded the unsupported $2,036.49 late charges award for remittitur.
A deficiency in evidence supporting an award of late charges does not warrant reversal of an entire foreclosure judgment; instead, remittitur is the appropriate remedy.
[1] An unsupported award of late charges in a foreclosure judgment does not warrant reversal of the entire foreclosure; remittitur is the appropriate remedy to reduce the jud…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEdward Newman borrowed money secured by a mortgage, and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC initiated foreclosure proceedings. The trial court entered summary j…
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 Evidentiary Sufficiency cases and more on FLexlaw
Edward Newman appeals the final summary judgment of foreclosure in favor of Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC. The parties agree that Ocwen failed to present sufficient evidence to support the trial count’s award of $2036.49 in late charges, However, .Newman claims that this deficiency created a,genuine issue of material fact and that the trial court’s entry of summary judgment was therefore fundamental error. We disagree.. : .
Newman’s' issue with the lack of evidence to support the awarded total for late charges alone does not warrant reversal of the entire foreclosure judgment. See, e.g., Freiman v. Nat’l City Mortg. Co., 183 So.3d 1111 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (affirming foreclosure judgment in part and reversing the unsupported award of attorney fees); Peuguero v. Bank of Am., N.A., 169 So.3d 1198, 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (affirming foreclosure judgment in part and reversing and remanding for a hearing on the unsupported amount of the judgment). In its cohcession of error, Ocwen does not request an opportunity to correct the eviden-tiary shortcomings with regard to its alleged late charges and instead asks that this court remand for remittitur to reduce the amount of the final judgment by $2036.49." This solution is appropriate. Therefore, we affirm the final summary judgment but réverse the trial court’s award of $2036.49 for late charges. And we remand for remittitur of the final judg: ment in that amount.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.
KHOUZAM and LUCAS, JJ., Concur. '
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
D.H. and L.H. v. Adept Cmty. Servs., Inc., 217 So. 3d 1072 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…rts applying a statute of limitations must follow the default rule codified in section 95.031(1) that “[a] cause of action accrues when the last element constituting the cause of action occurs.” See also Nat’l Auto Serv. Ctrs., Inc. v. F/R 550, LLC, 192 So. 3d 498, 506 n.7 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (“[T]he delayed discovery doctrine is a creature of statute and generally does not apply when a statute does not provide for it.” (citing Davis, 832 So. 2d at 710-12)). For that reason, the delayed discovery doctrine is n…
-
Halifax Hosp. Med. Ctr. v. State, 278 So. 3d 545 (Fla. 2019)…uage currently in effect, Halifax quotes its 1925 enabling act and then traces the history of legislative revisions in an effort to dictate how the 2003 act should be read. We reject Halifax’s approach. Nat. Auto Serv. Ctrs., Inc. v. F/R 550, LLC, 192 So. 3d 498, 504 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (“The interpretation of a statute begins ‘with the plain meaning of the actual language’ the statute employs.” (quoting Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc. v. Horowitch, 107 So. 3d 362, 367 (Fla. 2013))); see also Rollins v. - 7…
-
The Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Glenville, 252 So. 3d 1120 (Fla. 2018)
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Natacha Peuguero and Angelo Peuguero v. Bank OF Am., N.A., 169 So. 3d 1198 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
- Freiman v. Nat'l City Mortg. Co., 183 So. 3d 1111 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)