PNC BANK, N.A., ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
JESSICA CLARK, ET AL., 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 the trial court erred in dismissing the foreclosure action for lack of standing, as the bank established standing and the borrower's breach.
The bank filed a foreclosure action after the borrower failed to pay ad valorem taxes, leading to a tax certificate being issued. The bank paid off th…
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 Breach Of Note cases and more on FLexlaw
In this foreclosure action, after a non-jury trial, the trial court dismissed the case for lack of standing. This was error. See, e.g., Clay Cty. Land Tr. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, Nat’l Ass’n, 152 So.3d 83, 85 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (“When appellee filed the foreclosure complaint, it attached a copy of the note and an undated allonge to the note containing an endorsement in blank. This was sufficient to establish as a matter of law that appellee had standing to bring the foreclosure action”).
Furthermore, the undisputed evidence indicated that (1) the borrower failed to pay the 2011 ad valorem taxes on the property as the note required; (2) the Monroe County Tax Collector issued a tax certificate to a third party as a result of the unpaid taxes; (3) the bank paid off the tax certificate and paid subsequent years’ taxes; and (4) as of the date of the filing of the foreclosure action, the borrower still had not paid the bank the taxes and other costs the bank had advanced or incurred in an amount no less than $4508.50, as admitted by the borrower’s attorney at oral argument. In these circumstances, the *266bank established a breach and the trial court should have entered a foreclosure judgment. See, e.g., Liberty Home Equity-Sols., Inc. v. Raulston, No. 4D15-3652, 206 So.3d 58, 61, 2016 WL 7118841, at *3 (Fla. 4th DCA Dec. 7, 2016) (“[T]he trial court erred in finding that appellee’s failure to pay property taxes and hazard insurance was not a material breach justifying foreclosure.”).
The parties hotly disputed the amounts owed and the record reflects conflicting evidence on this point. We remand for the trial court to make factual findings consistent with this opinion and to enter a final judgment of foreclosure.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Duran v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 245 So. 3d 977 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See PNC Bank, N. A. v. Clark, 211 So. 3d 265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) ; Ortiz v. PNC Bank, N. A., 188 So. 3d 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ; Clay Cty. Land Tr. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 152 So. 3d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). See also Rincon v. Bank of America, N.A., 206 So. 3d 793 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016).…
-
Hernandez v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, 232 So. 3d 482 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See PNC Bank, N.A. v. Clark, 211 So. 3d 265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017); Ortiz v. PNC Bank, N.A., 188 So. 3d 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016); Clay Cty. Land Tr. No. 08-04-25-0078-014-27 v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 152 So. 3d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).…
Authorities Cited
- Clay Cnty. Land Tr. # 08-04-25-0078-014-27 v. Jpmorgan Chase Bank, 152 So. 3d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
- Liberty Home Equity Solutions, Inc. v. Raulston, 206 So. 3d 58 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)