Skip to main content

3d DCA Watch -- Rehearing En Banc Granted, Tons of Amicus, Plus a Powerful Dissent!


Look at the list of heavy hitters populating this foreclosure opinion, including many amicus briefs, leading to a rehearing en banc and a newly substituted opinion (plus a strong dissent).

What could all the tsuris be about?
We therefore conclude that dismissal of a foreclosure action accelerating payment on one default does not bar a subsequent foreclosure action on a later default if the subsequent default occurred within five years of the subsequent action.
There's more:
Stated another way, despite acceleration of the balance due and the filing of an action to foreclose, the installment nature of a loan secured by such a mortgage continues until a final judgment of foreclosure is entered and no action is necessary to reinstate it via a notice of “deceleration” or otherwise.
Hmm, this doesn't seem overly consumer-friendly. 

Anything else?

Yes, a lengthy pre-rebuttal to Judge Scales' stinging dissent, and a q-and-a with two different Florida Bar sections(!) as to what these practitioners think the law is or should be in this area.

Say what?

Yes, read Judge Scales for more on all this:
Relying on a sweepingly broad interpretation of Singleton v. Greymar Associates – a Florida Supreme Court case in which the term “statute of limitations” is not even mentioned – the en banc majority opinion reverses the summary judgment and, in the process: (i) creates the legal fiction that a lender’s acceleration does not affect the installment nature of the note; (ii) rewrites the acceleration and reinstatement provisions of the parties’ note and mortgage; and (iii) effectively rewrites the statute of limitations for mortgage foreclosure actions in Florida.
On to Tally goes this one, in my humble estimation!

Comments

  1. The smarter Judges are with the dissent.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Blatant corporate judicial activism for the banks

    ReplyDelete
  3. 3:32. Well duh, have you been to any foreclosure court in Florida. "Oh, you won't pay your lawyers a proper fee to prosecute your claim Mr. Big Bank? Don't worry, we aren't neutral and detached magistrates. We are the Florida Supreme Court and we are in the tank for you; we'll push your cases along so you don't have to. It is only socialism when the government helps the people."

    ReplyDelete
  4. The appellate court (third district) is the new trial court. Taking and weighing evidence. Holy guacamole.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The banks have always controlled. It us now just so plainly obvious.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The sad thing is that for many people, the foreclosure sausage works will be their only exposure to our judicial system, perhaps barring small claims or traffic. The circuit courts ought to be doing their best to uphold justice and follow the law.

    Instead, in foreclosures, it appears that
    (a) limitation does not apply, sue on an 8-year-old default, no problem
    (b) competent testimony is not required
    (c) if you ``relied'' on someone elses records, they are correct
    (d) correct records are not only not likely, but not required
    (e) in fact, forget most of the rules of evidence

    Sometimes the appeals courts are a disappointment also, but you know the odds when you go in there.

    Still, consider what happens. The rules of evidence are ignored, banks come in with flimsy or outright dishonest evidence, and the judge makes it clear that the main concern is getting the judgment rubber-stamped and your defendants are just wasting the court's time. If it is not a particular person, it may well be the [soon to be ex-] neighbor.

    Knowing this to be the public's most likely experience with the court system, you are now free to speculate as to the level of respect the system can expect.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

My Kind of Federal Judge!

Sure we have Scott Rothstein and his lovely Tom James clothier Romina Sifuentes, but Louisiana has ED LA judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr.:
A federal judge from Louisiana who had run up big gambling debts routinely solicited money and gifts from lawyers with cases before his court, Congressional investigators said Tuesday as the House opened impeachment hearings in the judge’s case. The judge, G. Thomas Porteous Jr. of Federal District Court, had more than $150,000 in credit card debt by 2000, mostly for cash advances spent in casinos, investigators said. Judge Porteous’s requests for cash became so frequent that one New Orleans lawyer said he started trying to dodge the judge.“He began to use excuses that he needed it for tuition, he needed it for living expenses,” the lawyer, Robert Creely, told a House Judiciary Committee task force. “I would avoid him until I couldn’t avoid him anymore.”
Mr. Creely said he and his law partner, Jacob Amato, gave Judge Porteous an estimated $20,000 o…

Honoring Richard C. Seavey

I drank a shit-ton of bourbon last night. Enough to float a battleship.

My head hurts. But not as much as my heart.

We lost another lawyer over the weekend. Not someone who will receive facebook accolades and other public claims of friendship and statements that he shaped and changed lives and careers. Just a guy who did the best he could with what he had. Every day. And he did very, very well to be the best person he could be. 
Richard Seavey was a profoundly private person. In his 49 years, he walked through more than his share of trials and tribulations, mostly asking for no help, leaning on no one. 

Richard was a fantastic lawyer. He could try a case. He could "litigate" a case. He could mediate and settle a case. He was nuanced. He bent but never broke. The blustery Miami lawyer never scared him. To the contrary, he found humor in it, studying it like a science project. Richard never got too high or too low. He was good at lawyering, but you got the f…

First Carnival Triumph Lawsuit on File!

It was filed in the SD FL (of course) and is pending before Judge Graham.

Check it out here.

The lawyer on the pleading is Marcus R. Spagnoletti.