LUCKY NATION, LLC AND NINA SOLONENKO
v.
HASSAN AL-MAGHAZCHI

Fla. 4th DCA | 2020-06-17
No. 19-2097
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2020) Caution
Cited by 78 cases

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.

Holding

An equitable subrogee may re-foreclose a first mortgage in a supplementary proceeding, and inferior lienholders retain redemption rights, but the redemption amount must exclude interest, property taxes, and expenses incurred after filing the original foreclosure complaint.

Headnotes

[1] A party who forecloses a junior lien without naming the holder of a senior mortgage as a party may be equitably subrogated to the rights of the senior mortgage holder to…

[2] Inferior lien holders have the right of redemption of a senior mortgage.

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
Key Quotes

“the trial court improperly included in the redemption amount the full amount in the original final judgment plus interest and property taxes that accrued after entry of the original foreclosure judgment”

The court's identification of the error requiring reversal and remand
Facts & Procedural History

Lucky Nation, LLC foreclosed on a homeowners' association lien and later deeded half its interest to Nina Solonenko. Hassan Al-Maghazchi foreclosed on…

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.

Topics
Right Of Redemption Equitable Subrogation Foreclosure

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Right Of Redemption cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

LUCKY NATION, LLC, and NINA SOLONENKO,

Appellants,

v.

HASSAN AL-MAGHAZCHI,

Appellee.

No. 4D19-2097

[June 17, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Barry J. Stone, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE 13- 003907 (11).

Andrey Solonenko, Pembroke Pines, for appellants. Omar M. Saleh of Florida Legal Consulting, P.A., Sunrise, for appellee. DAMOORGIAN, J.

Appellants, Lucky Nation, LLC and Nina Solonenko, appeal a supplemental final judgment in favor of Appellee, Hassan Al-Maghazchi, and an order denying Appellants’ motion to amend the supplemental final judgment. The underlying dispute to this appeal resolved the parties’ competing interests to a parcel of real property encumbered by a first mortgage and a homeowners’ association lien. Appellant Lucky Nation, LLC obtained its interest through a foreclosure of the association lien and later deeded half its interest to Appellant Nina Solonenko. Appellee obtained his interest through the foreclosure of the first mortgage, to which Appellants were not named as parties. When Appellee discovered the competing interests, he sought the right to re-foreclose the first mortgage as equitable subrogee of the original first mortgage holder. Ultimately, the trial court allowed Appellee to re-foreclose the first mortgage in a supplementary proceeding and entered a final judgment in favor of Appellee.

In the final judgment, Appellants were granted, as inferior lien holders, the right of redemption of the first mortgage. See Quinn Plumbing Co. v. New Miami Shores Corp., 129 So. 690, 692 (Fla. 1930). After considering

2

Appellants’ arguments, we conclude that the trial court did not err in entering final judgment in favor of Appellee or granting Appellants the right of redemption. Accordingly, to that extent, we affirm the final judgment without further comment.

However, the trial court improperly included in the redemption amount the full amount in the original final judgment plus interest and property taxes that accrued after entry of the original foreclosure judgment in favor of the first mortgage holder. This was error, and Appellee concedes that the inclusion of the post-judgment interest and taxes was erroneous. See Quinn Plumbing Co., 129 So. at 693; Thecsuccess Corp. v. Graham, 577 So. 2d 590, 591 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). Accordingly, we remand for the trial court to delete the interest, property taxes, and expenses that were incurred after the date of the filing of the original first mortgage foreclosure complaint. See Pinto v. EMC Mortg. Corp., 700 So. 2d 91, 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded.1 LEVINE, C.J., and KUNTZ, J., concur.

* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

Footnotes
1 We are mindful of the issuance of Administrative Order SC20-23, Amendment 2 (the requirement in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.580(a) for the clerk to issue a writ of possession “forthwith” remains suspended) and Executive Order 20-137 (extending, until 12:01 a.m. on July 1, 2020, Executive Order 20-94, which suspends and tolls any statute providing for a mortgage foreclosure cause of action under Florida law). We trust any motions directed to those orders shall be filed in the lower tribunal upon issuance of our mandate.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (40 total)

  • The Richter Jewelry Co., Inc. v. Schweinert, 125 Fla. 199 (Fla. 1935)
    …f redemption belongs to the mortgagor and those claiming under him. This right cannot be extinguished except by due process of law. Stovall v. Stokes, 94 Fla. 717, 115 Sou. Rep. 828; Quinn Plumbing Co., Inc., v. New Miami Shores Corp., 100 Fla. 413, 129 Sou. Rep. 690, 73 A. L. R. 600. “He who seeks equity must do equity, so it is an essential part of a bill to redeem a mortgage that it offer in express terms to pay the amount due, with costs. Horn v. Indianapolis Nat. Bk., 125 Ind. 381, 25 N. E. 558, 21 A. S. R…
  • DMG Inv. Tr., LLC v. Dinorah B. Cepeda (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
    …s. Corp. v. Hogan, 117 So. 846, 848 (Fla. 1928) (“One who holds the legal title to mortgaged property is not only necessary, but is an indispensable, party defendant in a suit to foreclose a mortgage.”); Quinn Plumbing Co. v. New Miami Shores Corp., 129 So. 690, 692 (Fla. 1930) (stating “[t]he right to redeem is an incident to every mortgage” and “cannot be extinguished except by due process of law”); MST Corp. v. Caribe Ins. Agency Corp., 314 So. 3d 432, 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“Florida law is well settle…
  • Allstate Mortg. Corp. OF Fla. & Inca Int'l Corp. v. Strasser, 277 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
    …fore recognized an inherent right of redemption which could be exercised at any time prior to entry of the order confirming the sale, unless otherwise directed by the trial court. Quinn Plumbing Company v. New Miami Shores Corporation, 100 Fla. 413, 129 So. 690; Huss v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 123 Fla. 20, 165 So. 896; Holloway v. Sewell, 140 Fla. 464, 191 So. 825; Rosen v. Hunter, Fla.App.1969, 227 So. 2d 689. This right of redemption evolved from the [*845] common law. Connor v. Connor,…

Previewing 3 of 40 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw