XPRESS TITLE, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
JASON M. WANDNER, P.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.
Xpress Title, a closing agent and escrow agent, appealed a default final judgment entered in favor of creditor Wandner when a judgment lien was not satisfied at closing. The court reversed, holding that because escrow agent liability is limited to funds remaining after priority claims are satisfied, damages are unliquidated and require proof at trial rather than entry by default.
The court reversed, holding that because an escrow agent's liability cannot exceed the amount remaining in escrow after priority claims (such as the purchase money mortgage) are satisfied, the damages are unliquidated and must be proven at trial rather than determined by default judgment.
[1] Damages are considered liquidated when they can be determined by mathematical calculation or the application of definite rules of law.
[2] An escrow agent's liability for failing to satisfy a judgment lien cannot exceed the amount remaining in escrow after senior claims are satisfied.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Damages are liquidated when they can be determined by mathematical calculation or the application of definite rules of law.”
Establishes the legal standard for liquidated damages that the trial court applied
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWandner obtained a $21,260.84 judgment against Marlene Ramirez, which was properly recorded as a lien on her home. Ramirez sold the home to the Mendez…
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 Purchase Money Mortgage cases and more on FLexlaw
[*279] PER CURIAM.
Xpress Title, Inc. appeals from the trial court’s order denying its motion to vacate a default final judgment in favor of Jason M. Wandner, P.A. We reverse.
Wandner sued Xpress Title and Nicelo and Elizabeth Mendez for failure to satisfy a judgment lien. In a separate suit Wand-ner had obtained a final judgment in the amount of $21,260.84 against Marlene Ramirez, a non-party to the instant suit, which was properly recorded so that it became a lien on Ramirez’ home. Ramirez then sold her home to Nicelo and Elizabeth Mendez and Xpress Title was the closing agent. Prior to the sale, Xpress Title requested a payoff letter from Wand-ner detailing the definite amounts due under the judgment, which Wandner provided. The closing occurred, but Wandner’s judgment was not satisfied. Subsequently, Wandner filed an amended complaint against Xpress Title alleging fraudulent misrepresentation and violations of sections 501.204 and 772.104, Florida Statutes (2004), and against the Mendezes to foreclose upon the property. The trial court entered a default judgment against Xpress Title for failure to file a responsive pleading, and later, entered a final judgment against Xpress Title for the full amount of the judgment lien.
Xpress Title sought to set aside the final judgment alleging that it was fundamental error to enter final judgment without notice to Xpress Title, and that the damages had to be proven at trial where the complaint sought unliquidated damages. After a hearing, the court entered an order denying Xpress Title’s motion, finding that the damages set forth in the complaint were indeed fixed and definite and, therefore, liquidated. Damages are liquidated when they can be determined by mathematical calculation or the application of definite rules of law. See Hill v. Murphy, 872 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); see also Fiera.com, Inc. v. DigiCast New Media Group, Inc., 837 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Dunkley Stucco, Inc. v. Progressive Am. Ins. Co., 751 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
However, the title company points out that since it was acting as escrow agent, the plaintiff suffered injury only if there was enough money in escrow for him to have his judgment paid in whole or in part after senior claims were satisfied. As payoff of the purchase money mortgage on the property has priority over other liens, the purchase money mortgage would have to be paid off first. Only if there is money left over would Wandner be paid. If no money was left over, Wandner never would have received anything from the escrow and therefore suffered no damages. Because the escrow agent’s liability cannot exceed the amount left over in the escrow, the damages are unliquidated.
Accordingly we reverse the order appealed and remand the cause to the trial court for a trial on damages.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Dunkley Stucco, Inc. v. Progressive Am. Ins. Co., 751 So. 2d 723 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)
- Hill v. Murphy, 872 So. 2d 919 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- FIERA.COM, Inc. v. Digicast NEW Media Grp., Inc., 837 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)