VENTURES TRUST 2013-I-NH, BY MCM CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC, ITS TRUSTEE, APPELLANT,
v.
DANA M. JOHNSON AND ROBIN L. JOHNSON, 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.
Ventures Trust appealed a trial court's dismissal of its mortgage foreclosure complaint on statute of limitations grounds. The court affirmed, holding that the cause of action for a missed mortgage payment accrues on the day after payment is due, not when the lender accelerates the debt, and the complaint filed over five years after the alleged default date was time-barred.
The cause of action for each missed monthly installment payment accrues the day after each payment is due, not on the date of acceleration of the entire balance. Because the alleged default date of September 1, 2010 was clearly beyond the five-year statute of limitations, the foreclosure complaint filed on October 27, 2015 was time-barred.
[1] A cause of action for mortgage foreclosure based on missed installment payments accrues on the day after each installment is due, not upon acceleration of the entire debt…
[2] A foreclosure action filed more than five years after the alleged date of default is barred by the statute of limitations.
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“the accrual of the cause of action for each missed monthly installment payment accrues the day after each is due to be paid, not on the date of the acceleration of the entire balance”
Establishes the controlling legal principle for when a mortgage foreclosure cause of action accrues for statute of limitations purposes.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceVentures Trust filed a foreclosure complaint against Dana M. Johnson and Robin L. Johnson on October 27, 2015, alleging a default date of September 1,…
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 Acceleration Of Debt cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, Ventures Trust 2013-1-NH (“Ventures”), appeals the trial court’s order granting Appellees’, Dana M. Johnson and Robin L. Johnson, motion to dismiss the mortgage foreclosure complaint with prejudice. The complaint was dismissed on the basis of the statute of limitations in that Ventures’ foreclosure action was instituted on October 27, 2015, alleging a default date of September 1, 2010, which was beyond the five-year statute of limitations as set forth in section 95.11(2)(c), Florida Statutes (2015). In opposing the motion to dismiss, Ventures argued that its cause of action did not accrue until it accelerated the debt, which occurred when it filed the foreclosure complaint on October 27, 2015. We disagree and affirm the judgment.
It is well-settled that the accrual of the cause of action for each missed monthly installment payment accrues the day after each is due to be paid, not on the date of the acceleration of the entire balance. See Bartram v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 211 So.3d 1009 (Fla. 2016); U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Bartram, 140 So.3d 1007 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). In this case the default date alleged was, September 1, 2010, which was clearly beyond the five-year statute of limitations. This case is not unlike Hicks v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 178 So.3d 957 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015), and Ventures is not precluded from filing a new foreclosure action based on different acts or dates of default not previously alleged, provided the new cause of action is instituted within the limitation periods for each default. See § 95.11(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2015).
AFFIRMED.
BERGER and EDWARDS, JJ., and JACOBUS, B.W., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bartram v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 211 So. 3d 1009 (Fla. 2016)
- U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Bartram, 140 So. 3d 1007 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)
- Hicks v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 178 So. 3d 957 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)