-
95 Fla. 889·
Fla.·
1928-05-10
·cited 131×
This case involves a wife's appeal of a foreclosure suit on her separate property, which she mortgaged to secure her husband's debt. The appellate court affirmed the foreclosure, finding no valid grounds for challenging the mortgage based on lack of consideration, duress, or impr
-
153 Fla. 622·
Fla.·
1943-10-29
·cited 81×
Jackson v. Parker concerns a purchase-money mortgage on a house in Ocala, Florida. The mortgagors, the Jacksons, purchased the property from the Monroes and signed a promissory note on the back of the mortgage after it was recorded. The key issue was whether a release of the mort
-
351 So. 2d 1122·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1977-11-15
·cited 29×
The court held that the trial court did not err in its disposition of the marital home's second mortgage, visitation limitations, attorney fees, or expert witness fees.
-
77 Fla. 163·
Fla.·
1919-02-13
·cited 26×
This case involves a mortgage foreclosure where the defendants appealed the lower court's decision to strike portions of their answer. The appellate court affirmed the foreclosure, finding that the defenses raised by the defendants were insufficient.
-
142 So. 2d 343·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1962-05-25
·cited 17×
In this mortgage foreclosure appeal, the court reversed the trial court's dismissal and directed entry of a foreclosure decree. The appellate court held that a conditional satisfaction of mortgage was never properly delivered because neither party's stated conditions precedent we
-
28 So. 3d 94·
Fla. 1st DCA·
2009-12-31
·cited 10×
The United States appeals a trial court decision that declared a mortgage null and void for lack of consideration, denied foreclosure, and awarded $100,000 in damages to borrowers who alleged the government violated consumer credit laws. The appellate court reversed, holding the
-
51 Fla. 473·
Fla.·
1906-01-01
·cited 10×
The Florida Supreme Court upheld the validity of a mortgage executed by a married woman on her separate statutory property to secure a business debt. The court rejected arguments that the mortgage lacked good consideration or constituted fraud on creditors, holding that married w
-
334 F.2d 763·
3d Cir.·
1964-07-16
·cited 6×
The court held that the lower court erred in applying res judicata and that certain issues regarding the validity of a second mortgage and its assignment could not be determined on the present record, requiring remand.
-
59 Fla. 437·
Fla.·
1910-01-01
·cited 6×
A merchant sought to foreclose two mortgages on a farmer's crops. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure, holding that despite broad language in the mortgage documents, the mortgages were intended only to secure specific guano notes and not all future
-
177 So. 2d 897·
Fla. 2d DCA·
1965-08-17
·cited 4×
Silver Waters Corporation and other defendants appealed from a decree adjudging two mortgages held by the Murphys to be superior to the defendants' mortgages, including one held by First Federal Savings and Loan. The court held that under Florida's mortgage statute for future adv
-
119 Fla. 689·
Fla.·
1935-04-09
·cited 3×
In this mortgage foreclosure appeal, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decree foreclosing on a mortgage executed by W. H. Galloway to G. B. Tompkins. The appellants' defense that the mortgage lacked consideration and was executed for another's benefit failed un
-
117 Fla. 87·
Fla.·
1934-10-24
·cited 3×
Jessie Layne and others appealed a foreclosure decree involving a mortgage given by F. H. Ives' mother to secure a loan made by Mrs. Annie M. E. Brown. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the decree, holding that the mortgage had valid consideration and was not void despite allega
-
629 So. 2d 157·
Fla. 4th DCA·
1993-08-25
·cited 2×
The FDIC, as manager of the FSLIC Resolution Fund, appealed a trial court decision that an unrecorded mortgage satisfaction barred foreclosure on a nursery. The appellate court reversed, holding that the satisfaction failed to comply with the federal D'Oench, Duhme doctrine and 1
-
304 F.2d 746·
9th Cir.·
1962-06-28
·cited 2×
The Court of Appeals held that the District Court erred in finding the chattel mortgage valid, reversing the District Court's order and reinstating the Referee's conclusion that the mortgage was void for non-compliance with California's bulk sales statute.
-
298 F.2d 129·
9th Cir.·
1961-12-06
·cited 2×
A chattel mortgage is void against a bankruptcy trustee if the notice of intended mortgage does not accurately reflect the manner and timing of consideration payment, even if some consideration was paid on the stated date.
-
837 F. Supp. 1148·
M.D. Fla.·
1993-11-10
·cited 1×
The court held that petitioners failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that they held a superior legal interest in the forfeited properties or that they were bona fide purchasers without cause to believe the property was subject to forfeiture.
-
359 So. 2d 514·
Fla. 3d DCA·
1978-05-23
Penmont Enterprises appealed from a foreclosure judgment and order granting a new trial in a damages action arising from the 1975 sale of corporate stock secured by chattel mortgage. The court affirmed the foreclosure judgment, finding no reversible error in the lower court's dec