NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, APPELLANT,
v.
PAUL J. KELLY AND BETH A. KELLY, 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 appellate court reversed an involuntary dismissal of a foreclosure action, holding that the mortgage company had standing to foreclose. The court found that proof of valid, pre-suit assignments of the mortgage and note was sufficient to establish standing, even if the initial indorsement was questionable.
Yes, Nationstar Mortgage had standing to foreclose. The court held that evidence of valid, timely assignments of the note and mortgage from the original payee or its nominee to the foreclosure plaintiff is sufficient proof of standing.
[1] A foreclosure plaintiff has standing when it proves a valid, pre-suit assignment of the note and mortgage from the original payee or its nominee to the plaintiff.
[2] Proof of a valid chain of assignments of the mortgage and note establishes a foreclosure plaintiff's standing.
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 intelligence“This Court held in Taylor v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 44 So. 3d 618, 622-23 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010), that evidence of a valid pre-suit assignment of the note and mortgage from the original payee or its nominee, MERS, to the foreclosure plaintiff was sufficient proof that the plaintiff held the note and mortgage and had standing to foreclose.”
Establishes the legal precedent for proving standing through valid assignments.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNationstar Mortgage initiated a foreclosure action against the appellees. At trial, Nationstar presented evidence of valid assignments of the mortgage…
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 Blank Endorsement cases and more on FLexlaw
Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, (“Nations-tar”) appeals the involuntary dismissal of its foreclosure action against Paul J. Kelly and Beth A. Kelly (collectively “Appel-lees”), on the ground that it did not have standing to foreclose. The evidence admitted at trial proved that the mortgage and note were validly assigned pre-suit by MERS, as nominee for the original payee, to the original foreclosure plaintiff. The original plaintiff then assigned the mortgage and note to Nationstar, which was subsequently substituted as the party plaintiff. At trial, Nationstar proved that Appellees defaulted on the loan and that they received a notice of default and acceleration of the loan.
The trial court correctly rejected Na-tionstar’s first asserted basis of standing by ruling that mere possession of the blank-indorsed note did not prove Nations-tar’s standing because someone other than the original payee initially indorsed the note.1 However, the trial court erred when it failed to find that Nationstar had standing to foreclose despite proof of valid, timely assignments of the note and mortgage. This Court held in Taylor v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 44 So.3d 618, 622-23 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010), that evidence of a valid pre-suit assignment of the note and mortgage from the original payee or its nominee, MERS, to the foreclosure plaintiff was sufficient proof that the plaintiff held the note and mortgage and had standing to foreclose. Nationstar, through its documents and witness, established an unbroken chain of valid and timely assignments of the mortgage and note; therefore, the trial court erred in ruling that Nationstar had not proved standing. Because Nationstar had standing to foreclose, the trial court erred by ordering an involuntary dismissal. We reverse and remand for a new trial.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
LAWSON, C.J., and WALLIS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc'y, FSB v. Greenwell (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)…e were transferred to Bayview before the complaint was filed. This evidence was sufficient to establish that Bayview was the holder of the note and that it had standing to sue at the time the complaint was filed. See Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Kelly, 199 So. 3d 1051, 1052 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (holding that appellant had standing 4 where evidence showed that there was an unbroken chain of valid and timely assignments of the note and the mortgage); Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Morcom, 125 So. 3d 320, 322 (Fla. 5th DC…
-
Greunke v. The Bank of N.Y. Mellon (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
-
Bank OF NEW York v. Calloway (Fla. 4th DCA 2020)
Authorities Cited
- Taylor v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co., 44 So. 3d 618 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)