ROBERT R. FRANK, AS TRUSTEE, APPELLANT,
v.
LAND SERVICES, INC., ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
The court reversed the trial court's determination that Frank's mortgage interest was subordinate to other mortgagees, holding that a settlement agreement gave Frank equal priority in mortgage foreclosure proceeds on a pro rata basis.
A settlement agreement between the parties established that Frank's mortgage interest had equal dignity with other mortgagees' interests, entitling him to pro rata sharing in foreclosure proceeds.
[1] A settlement agreement between mortgagees establishing equal priority among them is enforceable to give each mortgagee pro rata rights in foreclosure proceeds regardless…
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 intelligenceRobert R. Frank, as trustee, sought priority in mortgage foreclosure proceeds securing $32,000 owed to him. The Orange Blossom Group and other mortgag…
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 Mortgage Priority cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The facts of this complex litigation need not be stated for purposes of disposing of this appeal. The only issue which merits discussion pertains to the priorities between Robert R. Frank and the Orange Blossom Group in the proceeds of the mortgage foreclosure. In this respect, we hold that the court below erred in holding that the interest of Robert R. Frank in the mortgages securing the payment to him of $32,000 was subordinate to the interests of the other mortgagees.
The settlement agreement entered into on October 3, 1972, between all of the parties reflects an intent to give Frank security under the mortgages equal in dignity to the other mortgagees and renders the authorities cited by the Orange Blossom Group inapplicable to this case. Cf. Kissimmee Everglades Land Co. v. Carr, 1924, 88 Fla. 387, 102 So. 335. Our holding does not affect any payments previously made to the Orange Blossom Group because there was nothing to prevent the mortgagor from making payments on whichever promissory note it pleased.
The judgment is affirmed in all respects, except that Frank shall be entitled to share in the proceeds of the mortgage foreclosure on a pro rata basis with the other mortgagees.
McNULTY, C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.