BAY HOLDINGS, INC., ET AL., APPELLANT,
v.
2000 ISLAND BOULEVARD CONDO. ASS'N, ETC., ET AL., 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.
Bay Holdings, a subsequent assignee of a foreclosure judgment, does not qualify for the safe harbor provision of section 718.116(1) because that statute limits protection to first mortgagees or subsequent holders of the first mortgage, not assignees of judgments.
A subsequent assignee of a final foreclosure judgment does not come within the safe harbor provision of section 718.116(1) because the statute's protection extends only to first mortgagees or subsequent holders of the first mortgage.
[1] A subsequent assignee of a final foreclosure judgment does not qualify for the safe harbor from condominium assessment liability under section 718.116(1), which protects…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“[w]e are not at liberty to add words to statutes that were not placed there by the Legislature.”
The court cited this principle from Knowles v. Beverly Enterprises to support its refusal to extend the statute's safe harbor beyond its express terms.
Bay Holdings, a subsidiary of Bank United FSB, was the subsequent assignee of a final judgment of foreclosure obtained by Bank United on a condominium…
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 Condominium Assessments cases and more on FLexlaw
SHEPHERD, J.
Bay Holdings, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank United FSB, appeals an adverse judgment below holding that it does not come under the safe harbor provision of section 718.116(1) of the Florida Statutes. Bay Holdings was the subsequent assignee of a final judgment of foreclosure obtained by Bank United, after Bank United became the foreclosing first mortgagee on a condominium unit in Miami-Dade County, Florida.
Section 718.116(1) provides a statutory cap on liability of foreclosing mortgagees for unpaid condominium assessments that become due prior to the first mortgagee’s acquisition of title pursuant to a foreclosure proceeding. Because the statute clearly and unambiguously affords this safe harbor only to first mortgagees or “a subsequent holder of the first mortgage,” (emphasis supplied), we affirm. See § 718.116(1), Fla. Stat. As the Florida Supreme Court has recently reminded, “[w]e are not at liberty to add words to statutes that were not placed there by the Legislature.” Knowles v. Beverly Enterprises, 898 So. 2d 1, 11, 2004 WL 2922097, slip op. at 11 (Fla. December 16, 2004) (Cantero, J., concurring), citing Hayes v. State, 750 So. 2d 1, 4 (Fla.1999).
To do so, would be an abrogation of legislative power. Donato v. American Tel. & Tel. Co., 767 So. 2d 1146, 1150 (Fla.2000); Holly v. Auld, 450 So. 2d 217, 219 (Fla.1984) (courts are “without power to construe an unambiguous statute in a way which would extend, modify, or limit its express terms”).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Futo Charles v. State, 204 So. 3d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…ate v. C.M., 154 So. 3d 1177, 1180 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (Levine, J.) (stating that courts are “not -at liberty to add words to statutes that were not placed there by the Legislature”) (quoting Bay Holdings, Inc. v. 2000 Island Boulevard Condo, Ass’n, 895 So. 2d 1197, 1197 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)). The majority has abandoned strict Scalian principles of interpretation for a mpre flexible view of statutory construction that implements the majority’s view of .sound sentencing policy. The original panel opinion reverse…
-
Peace River/Manasota Reg'l Water Supply Auth. v. IMC Phosphates Co., 18 So. 3d 1079 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…not placed there by the legislature. See Hayes v. State, 750 So. 2d 1, 4 (Fla.1999) (“We are not at liberty to add words to statutes that were not placed there by the Legislature.”); see also Bay Holdings, Inc. v. 2000 Island Boulevard Condo. Ass’n, 895 So. 2d 1197, 1197 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). To do so would be an abrogation of legislative power. Donato v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 767 So. 2d 1146, 1150-51 (Fla.2000); Holly v. Auld, 450 So. 2d 217, 219 (Fla.1984) (holding that courts are “without power to construe an…
-
Beltway Cap., LLC v. The Greens COA, Inc., 153 So. 3d 330 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)…oreclosure, to the lesser of those common expenses and regular assessments that came due in the twelve months preceding acquisition of title or one percent of the original mortgage debt. See also Bay Holdings, Inc. v. 2000 Island Blvd. Condo. Ass’n, 895 So. 2d 1197, 1197 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (noting that section 718.116(1) is a “safe harbor provision” that “provides a statutory cap on liability of foreclosing mortgagees for unpaid condominium assessments that become due prior to the first mortgagee’s acquisition…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Eugene Holly, M.D. v. Albert W. Auld, M.D., 450 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 1984)
- Kathyrn Hayes v. State, 750 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1999)
- Knowles v. Beverly Enterprises-Florida, Inc., 898 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2004)
- Rosario Donato v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 767 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 2000)