JOSEPH H. ST. MARTIN, AND JOSEPHINE A. ST. MARTIN, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
IRENE U. MCGEE, A WIDOW, AND LENA KROSSNER, A SINGLE WOMAN, 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 Florida Supreme Court affirmed a trial court's dismissal of a mortgage foreclosure action, holding that a mortgagee cannot foreclose on a purchase money mortgage solely for breach of a repair covenant when the security has not been impaired and has actually been enhanced by the mortgagor's improvements.
A mortgagee cannot foreclose on a purchase money mortgage for breach of a repair covenant when the security has not been impaired. The court must consider whether the breach is serious enough to warrant forfeiture in relation to the whole property and its ability to perform its proper function, and must apply equitable principles to prevent unjust and inequitable results.
“Under the circumstances, it is the view of the Court that it would be unjust and inequitable to order a foreclosure of this mortgage because of conditions as they existed on the date of filing the bill of complaint”
Establishes the trial court's equitable reasoning for denying foreclosure despite the technical breach of the repair covenant
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSt. Martin and his wife executed a purchase money mortgage on May 10, 1954. The mortgage contained a covenant requiring the mortgagors to keep the bui…
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 Covenant cases and more on FLexlaw
DREW, Chief Justice.
This is an appeal from a final decree dismissing complaint to foreclose a purchase money mortgage and taxing the costs against the plaintiff. The pertinent portions of the decree appealed from are as follows:
“The mortgage involved here is a ‘purchase money mortgage’. It was given May 10, 1954. Suit to foreclose the mortgage was filed December 20, 1954. The sole ground for 'foreclosure is that the mortgagors breached the covenant ‘to keep the building on said land in proper repair’. It has not been shown that the security has been impaired in the least. On the contrary, it would seem that because of certain improvements made by the mortgagors, the security has been enhanced. Under the circumstances, it is the view of the Court that it would be unjust and inequitable to order a foreclosure of this mortgage because' of conditions as they existed on the date of filing the bill of complaint, viz., December 20, 1954.”
Sunny Isles Boat Works, Inc., v. North Miami Beach Yacht Basin and Boat Repair Works, Inc., Fla., 70 So. 2d 899, was a declaratory decréé action seeking to terminate a long term. lease because of the failure of the lessee to “ ‘keep in good and safe condition and good repair as they are now in during the continuation of this lease agreement’ ” certain docks, buildings, tracks, carriages, etc., used for the docking, storage and repair of boats. The pivotal point in that case was whether or not the lessee had allowed the docks to deteriorate to such an extent that it would constitute a breach of a-condition of the lease and thereby entitle the lessor -to cancel it. This case, while involving a mortgage containing a covenant to be performed by the mortgagor “to keep the buildings on said land in proper repair”, raises the same essential and basic questions as that, in , the Sunny Isles Boat Works case, supra. • We approved in the last mentioned case a .decree of the chancellor below dismissing the bill of complaint with prejudice at the cost of • the lessor in which, among other things, the chancellor below said:
“ ‘Doubtless a point can be reached when the failure to replace the piling constitutes a breach of covenant so serious as to warant a forfeiture, but I do not think it had when the suit was filed (or the case heard). The question of the piling must be considered in relation to the whole property and its ability to perform its proper function as a boatyard. There is a very great deal to the leased property beside the docks and the boatyard is properly functioning.’ ”
In our examination of the record in this 'case, we find substantial evidence to support the findings of fact of the chancellor and we hold that he applied the correct principle of law to these facts.
The decree appealed from is affirmed.,
• TERRELL, THOMAS and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Hortensio Delgado and Nellie Geraldine Delgado v. Strong, 360 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1978)…obbel, 226 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). Consistent with this principle, courts have denied foreclosure of a mortgage where breach of the mortgage was merely a technical one and such breach did not place the security in jeopardy. See Martin v. McGee, 82 So. 2d 736 (Fla.1955); Schechtman v. Grobbel, supra. However, the presumption of correctness which surrounds a final judgment on review, Cohen v. Mohawk, Inc., 137 So. 2d 222 (Fla.1962); Williams v. Williams, 85 So. 2d 225 (Fla.1955); Staton v. Staton, 231 So.…
-
David v. SUN Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 461 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1984)…re may be denied when the security for the mortgage is not jeopardized. However, we find that the rule of law is not applicable to the facts of the case at bar. The actual rule stems from this Court’s decisions in cases such as St. Martin v. McGee, 82 So. 2d 736 (Fla.1955), and Delgado v. Strong, 360 So. 2d 73 (Fla.1978), dealing with breaches of mortgage clauses other than those requiring payment of principal and interest. Those cases concern technical breaches of covenants intended to preserve the mortgag…
-
First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Englewood v. Lockwood, 385 So. 2d 156 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980)…emonstration of impairment of security. . Other Florida decisions have clearly relied on impairment of security as an essential element of a plaintiffs right to foreclose a mortgage. Delgado v. Strong, 360 So. 2d 73 (Fla.1978); St. Martin v. McGee, 82 So. 2d 736 (Fla.1955); Home Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Palm Beach v. English, 249 So. 2d 707 (Fla.4th DCA 1971) (necessity of allegation of impairment of security recognized by trial court but appellate court found it unnecessary to rule on the question); Schec…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sunny Isles Boat Works, Inc. v. N. Miami Beach Yacht Basin & Boat Repair Works, Inc., 70 So. 2d 899 (Fla. 1954)