MAGLOIRE R. ISAAC AND MARIE R. ISAAC, APPELLANTS,
v.
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS OF SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2006-OPT5 ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-OPT5, 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.
Deutsche Bank sought to foreclose on a mortgage and was granted summary judgment. The appellants challenged whether Deutsche Bank had standing to foreclose, arguing it failed to adequately document its ownership of the mortgage and note. The court held that Deutsche Bank established standing through possession of the original note and mortgage, together with an allonge payable to bearer and an affidavit from Option One's successor in interest.
Deutsche Bank established standing to foreclose. By possessing an instrument payable to bearer (the note with the blank allonge), Deutsche Bank qualified as a valid holder under the Uniform Commercial Code and was entitled to enforce the note. The affidavit from Option One's successor in interest provided additional proof of Deutsche Bank's right to foreclose the mortgage.
[1] A note payable to bearer may be negotiated by transfer of possession alone.
[2] Possession of a negotiable instrument payable to bearer establishes the possessor as a valid holder entitled to enforce the instrument.
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“If an instrument is payable to bearer, it may be negotiated by transfer of possession alone.”
Establishes that Deutsche Bank's mere possession of the note with a blank allonge was sufficient to establish ownership rights.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDeutsche Bank, as trustee, brought a foreclosure action against the Isaacs. To prove ownership, Deutsche Bank presented the original mortgage, note, a…
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 Motion To Amend Answer cases and more on FLexlaw
In this appeal from a final summary judgment of mortgage foreclosure, the appellants claim that the court erred in entering a summary judgment because ap-pellee, Deutsche Bank, failed to establish its standing to bring the foreclosure action. In particular, they argue that Deutsche Bank failed to provide sufficient documentation reflecting how it obtained ownership of the mortgage and note from the original assignee, an entity called Option One. Deutsche Bank argues that it established *496its standing to foreclose based upon its possession of the original note and mortgage, combined with the affidavit of a representative of Option One’s successor in interest affirming Deutsche Bank’s ownership. We agree with Deutsche Bank that no material issues of fact remain and affirm.
To prove its ownership, Deutsche Bank filed with the court the original mortgage, note, and an allonge1 from Option One, payable to bearer, together with the aforementioned affidavit. The allonge, signed by an assistant secretary of Option One, did not state a payee. In this case, because the allonge did not state a payee, the note is “payable to bearer.” A promise or order is “payable to bearer” if it: “(a) [sjtates that it is payable to bearer ...; (b) [d]oes not state a payee; or (c) [sjtates that it is payable to or to the order of cash or otherwise indicates that it is not payable to an identified person.” § 673.1091(1), Fla. Stat. “If an instrument is payable to bearer, it may be negotiated by transfer of possession alone.” § 673.2011(2), Fla. Stat. A “holder” is defined as “[tjhe person in possession of a negotiable instrument that is payable either to bearer or to an identified person that is the person in possession.” § 671.201(21)(a), Fla. Stat.
Thus, Deutsche Bank, by virtue of its possession of an instrument payable to bearer, is a valid holder of the note and, therefore, is entitled to enforce it. The affidavit from Option One’s successor in interest, also uncontested, provides proof of Deutsche Bank’s right to foreclose the mortgage. See Servedio v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 46 So.3d 1105, 1107 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010); see also BAC Funding Consortium Inc. ISAOA/ATIMA v. Jean-Jacques, 28 So.3d 936, 938-39 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Stanley v. Wells Fargo Bank, 937 So.2d 708 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).
We also reject the appellants’ claim that the trial court should have granted their motion to amend their answer. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion, made for the first time at the hearing on summary judgment and without attaching a copy of the proposed amended pleading. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.190(a).
Because no genuine issue of material fact remained, the trial court properly entered summary judgment for the bank.
Affirmed.
TAYLOR and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ginnifer GEE v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 72 So. 3d 211 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…ent assigning note to another bank); Verizzo, 28 So. 3d at 977 (finding genuine issue of fact as to whether bank owned and held note where record did not reflect assignment or endorsement of note to bank). Cf. Isaac v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 74 So. 3d 495, 2011 WL 1261142 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (holding that assignee of promissory note and mortgage adequately established its ownership of note and mortgage, as necessary to confer standing to bring foreclosure action, where assignee filed original note an…
-
Wells Fargo Bank v. Bohatka, 112 So. 3d 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…ce” that the trial court approved. . It derives from the French word for lengthening or drawing out. The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary 57 (Oxford 1993). . Other courts have cited this definition. See Isaac v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 74 So. 3d 495, 496 n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). The Court in Booker also noted that “Florida's Uniform Commercial Code does not specifically mention an allonge, but notes that '[f]or the purpose of determining whether a signature is made on an instrument, a paper af…
-
Cobbum v. Citimortgage, Inc., 158 So. 3d 755 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…eadings. Finally, “the amendment clearly would not be futile considering the unrefuted allegations that [CitiMortgage] failed to comply with conditions precedent to suit.” See Laurencio, 65 So. 3d at 1193; cf. Isaac v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 74 So. 3d 495, 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (affirming denial of motion to amend where the facts establish the amendment would have been futile). Although the initial answer generally admitted that all conditions precedent had been met, CitiMortgage did not attach to…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- BAC Funding Consortium Inc. Isaoa/Atima v. Ginelle Jean-Jacques, 28 So. 3d 936 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Guiseppe Servedio v. US Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 46 So. 3d 1105 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- F.E. Booker v. Sarasota, Inc., 707 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Brown v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 937 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)