M. A. SMITH, LIQUIDATOR TRUST COMPANY OF FLORIDA, AS TRUSTEE,
v.
STATE LIFE INSURANCE CO., AN INDIANA CORPORATION
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 Florida Supreme Court affirmed an order appointing a receiver for hotel property in a mortgage foreclosure proceeding, finding the evidence sufficient to warrant the appointment for property preservation.
Yes, the evidence was sufficient to warrant the appointment of a receiver for the preservation of the property.
“The appeal in this case is from an order appointing a receiver of hotel property in a proceeding brought to foreclose a mortgage on such property.”
Identifies the nature of the appeal and the lower court's action.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved a proceeding to foreclose a mortgage on hotel property. The lower court had appointed a receiver for the property. The bill of compl…
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 Delinquent Taxes cases and more on FLexlaw
— The appeal in this case is from an order appointing a receiver of hotel property in a proceeding brought to foreclose a mortgage on such property.
*372The order appealed from should be affirmed on authority of Smith, as Liquidator, v. Taylor, Receiver, opinion filed November 10, 1933 and reported 150 Sou. 803, although it is not shown that outstanding tax liens are about to be foreclosed. The bill does allege that taxes for 1931 and 1932 are delinquent and unpaid and that the property was in .great need of repair to prevent material deterioration.
The evidence produced was quite sufficient to warrant the Court in finding that the appointment of a receiver was needful for the preservation of the property.
It is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Davis, C. J., and Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Atco Constr. & Dev. Corp. v. Beneficial Sav. Bank, 523 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…al representative testifying that she did not know whether there was a tenant on the premises in case number 87-1921, and not addressing the issue in Case Number 87-1922. Beneficial’s reliance in both cases on Smith v. State Life Insurance Company, 114 Fla. 371, 153 So. 842 (1934), is misplaced. In its summary opinion in Smith, the court indicated that while the appointment of a receiver was proper based on unpaid taxes for two years, the property involved therein was also in great need of repairs to preve…
-
Silver Pines P'rs Ltd. v. The Resolution Tr. Corp., 588 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…s and had made a written demand therefor pursuant to section 697.07, Florida Statutes. See Dixie Music Co. v. Pike, 135 Fla. 671, 185 So. 441 (1938); Bochterle v. Florida Milk Co., 132 Fla. 827, 182 So. 215 (1938); Smith v. State Life Insurance Co., 114 Fla. 371, 153 So. 842 (1934); Smith v. Taylor, 112 Fla. 597, 150 So. 803 (1933); Pasco v. Gamble, 15 Fla. 562 (1876); Overseas Dev. Inc. v. Krause, 323 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), cert, denied, 336 So. 2d 107 (Fla.1976). See also, Chapman v. Chapman, 526…
-
Douglas Ctr. RB-Gem, LLC v. Ocean Bank, 17 So. 3d 306 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…. 241 (1930). The trial court’s conclusion that the criteria had been satisfied is supported by the record. See id.; Fla. Reinvestment Corp. v. Cypress Sav. Ass’n, 509 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (en banc); see also Smith v. State Life Ins. Co., 114 Fla. 371, 153 So. 842 (1934). No abuse of discretion has been shown. After review of the transcript, and the competing proposed orders, we find no merit in the appellant’s argument that the written order deviates from the trial court’s oral pronouncement.…
Authorities Cited
- Zorn v. James, 112 Fla. 583 (Fla. 1933)