GEORGE H. PRATT AND CECELIA A. PRATT, HIS WIFE, SMITH HASELWOOD AND ADELYN B. HASELWOOD, HIS WIFE, AND GUION T. DELOACH, APPELLANTS,
v.
F. A. CHASTAIN CONSTRUCTION, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND F. A. CHASTAIN AND BESSIE L. CHASTAIN, HIS WIFE, 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 affirmed a lower court's equitable accounting, holding that the appellants failed to perform their contractual obligations by not conveying lots as required. The court directed the lower court to expunge improper deeds and cancel a certificate of title.
No, the trial court did not err. The appellants' failure to tender conveyance of the lots meant they had not performed their contractual obligations, and thus could not foreclose a mortgage they did not validly hold.
“The prior opinion clearly held that the appellants held no mortgage.”
Establishes the prior legal determination regarding the validity of the mortgage.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellants sought to foreclose a mortgage, but a prior appellate decision had already determined they held no valid mortgage. The appellants had n…
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 Contract Performance cases and more on FLexlaw
This case was previously before the court, and the facts giving rise to the action are set forth in the opinion reported as F. A. Chastain Corporation, Inc. v. Pratt, Fla.App.1962, 146 So.2d 910. In conformity with said opinion and the mandate, the chancellor below entered an equitable accounting adjudicating that the appellees were entitled to $12,445.18.
The appellants seek review of this order and contend that the trial court should have permitted them to foreclose the mortgage. The prior opinion clearly held that the appellants held no mortgage. It is apparent that the appellants never conveyed nor tendered the conveyance of the lots in question, except in accordance with the provisions of the original final decree, which was reversed by the prior opinion. The appellants have never attempted performance in accordance with the original contracts by deeding the lots to the appellees. Therefore, no error is shown in the equitable accounting rendered by the chancellor and same is affirmed, with directions to the chancellor to require the Clerk of the Circuit Court to expunge from the Public Records of Dade County, Florida, the deeds and mortgages recorded pursuant to the provisions of Paragraph 3 of the final decree heretofore reversed, and to cancel the certificate of title issued in connection with the previous foreclosure action, which was heretofore held to be improper.
Affirmed with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pratt v. Chastain Constr. Inc., 165 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 1964)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 157 So. 2d 101.…
Authorities Cited
- F. A. Chastain Constr., Inc. v. Pratt, 146 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)