I. B. L. CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION; HERIBERTO VALDEZ AND REINA MARGARITA VALDEZ, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
PAN AMERICAN BANK, N.A., APPELLEE
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.
A trial court lacks jurisdiction to enter a deficiency judgment if the motion is filed more than 10 days after the issuance of the clerk's certificate of title, absent an express reservation of jurisdiction.
A second mortgagee moved for a deficiency judgment almost one year after the issuance of a clerk's certificate of title following a foreclosure sale. …
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 Reservation Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
Almost one year after the issuance of a clerk’s certificate of title pursuant to a sale ordered in a final judgment of foreclosure, see Section 45.031, Florida Statutes (1979), the second mortgagee, Pan American Bank, N.A., moved for the entry of a deficiency judgment against the mortgagors. The trial court entered the judgment and they appeal. We reverse.
The final judgment of foreclosure did not contain an adjudication of the appellee’s demand for a deficiency judgment and neither expressly nor impliedly, see Galloway v. Musgrave, 154 So. 2d 846, 850-51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963),1 reserved jurisdiction to do so thereafter. Accordingly, that relief could be granted only upon an application filed within 10 days of the certificate of title. Katz v. Koolish, 142 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962). Since the appellee’s motion was filed far beyond that time, the trial court had no jurisdiction to grant it and to enter the judgment under review. Jappe v. Heller, 65 So. 2d 302 (Fla.1953); Cole v. Heidt, 124 Fla. 264, 168 So. 11 (1936); Atwell v. Atwell, 111 Fla. 352, 149 So. 555 (1933); Mabson v. Christ, 96 Fla. 756, 119 So. 131 (1928); Scheuermann v. Shamas, 97 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957); see Katz v. Koolish, supra.
Reversed.
. We reject as totally baseless Pan American’s claims that jurisdiction was “impliedly” reserved by virtue either simply of the denomination of the final judgment as one of “foreclosure” or of the provision — presumably by negative implication — that the first mortgagee waived its right to a deficiency. Compare Galloway v. Musgrave, supra, upon which the bank solely relies, in which the foreclosure judgment expressly reserved jurisdiction
to settle all other questions that this court has jurisdiction to settle under the complaint ... as the court shall deem proper in equity and as the circumstances of this case may require.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Mabson v. Christ, 96 Fla. 756 (Fla. 1928)
- Jappe v. Heller, 65 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 1953)
- Atwell v. Atwell, 111 Fla. 352 (Fla. 1933)
- Weintraub v. Weinstein, 154 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Vida Blanche Cole v. Heidt, 124 Fla. 264 (Fla. 1936)
- Scheuermann v. Shamas, 97 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957)
- Katz v. Koolish, 142 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)