THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON F/K/A THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATEHOLDERS OF CWABS, INC., ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-BC5, APPELLANT,
v.
THEODORE E. BLOEDEL, JR., AND SUE A. BLOEDEL, 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 court held that a lender's notice substantially complies with mortgage requirements if it is nearly equivalent or immaterially varies from the required content, allowing foreclosure.
[1] A lender's adherence to mortgage notice requirements is evaluated for substantial, rather than strict, compliance.
[2] A notice letter substantially complies with mortgage terms when its content is nearly equivalent to or varies only in immaterial respects from the mortgage requirements.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Bank of New York Mellon's foreclosure action was dismissed by the trial court for failure to comply with a mortgage's notice provision. The borrow…
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
The Bank of New York Mellon appeals a final judgment denying foreclosure. Following the presentation of the Bank’s case, borrower Theodore E. Bloedel, Jr. moved for involuntary dismissal of the action.1 The trial court determined that, as a result of the Bank’s failure to comply with the provisions of paragraph twenty-two of the mortgage, dismissal was warranted.2 At the time of the trial court’s ruling, this court’s opinion in Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Milam, 177 So.3d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015), had not issued.
In Green Tree, this court held that the lender’s adherence to the notice requirement set forth in paragraph twenty-two should be evaluated for substantial, rather than strict, compliance. 177 So.3d at 13-15. We further explained that, “when the content of a lender’s notice letter is nearly equivalent to or varies in only immaterial respects from what the mortgage requires, the letter substantially complies, and a minor variation from the terms of paragraph twenty-two should not preclude a foreclosure action.” Id. 14-15.
In light of Green Tree and other recent case law applying a substantial compliance analysis to the paragraph twenty-two notice requirements, we find that the default notice in this case substantially complied *148with paragraph twerity-two of the mortgage. See Bank of New York v. Mieses, 187 So.3d 919 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Bank of New York Mellon v. Johnson, 185 So.3d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016), Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment denying foreclosure and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
WALLACE and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Bloedel, 236 So. 3d 1164 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)
Authorities Cited
- Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Milam, 177 So. 3d 7 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)
- The Bank OF NEW York Mellon v. Johnson, 185 So. 3d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)
- Bank OF NEW York v. Luisa E. Mieses, 187 So. 3d 919 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)