Dragnet Clause

21 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Williams v. Walker-Thomas Furniture Co.
  350 F.2d 445· D.C. Cir.· 1965-08-11 ·cited 68×
  The dissenting judge agrees with the lower court's disposition of the issues presented.
• United States v. Am. Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville & Title & Tr. Co. of Fla.
  255 F.2d 504· 5th Cir.· 1958-05-26 ·cited 29×
  A mortgage's dragnet clause, even with a jointly and severally liable provision, does not secure obligations of a partnership or an individual acting as endorser or guarantor, unless explicitly stated.
• Commerce Fed. Sav. Bank v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  872 F.2d 1240· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-17 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the FDIC failed to prove the existence of a second debt secured by the deed of trust, and therefore the deed of trust was extinguished by operation of law upon payment of the first debt, making the FDIC's reliance on 12 U.S.C. § 1823(e) misplaced.
• United States v. Vahlco Corp.
  720 F.2d 885· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-09 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the future advances clause in the deed of trust unambiguously secured the subsequent line of credit, and that Vahlco's collateral impairment defense was unavailable to a note maker, while Magnum's estoppel defense against the SBA was barred. Therefore, the dir
• In re Cont'l Vending Mach. Corp. & Cont'l Apco, Inc. v. Wharton
  517 F.2d 997· 2d Cir.· 1975-06-05 ·cited 18×
  The court held that a Chapter X reorganization plan may consolidate assets and liabilities for unsecured creditors while preserving the separate security interests of secured creditors, as long as the plan is fair and equitable and preserves the bargained-for rights of secured cr
• Sonia Uransky in Bankruptcy of Dean Barnard v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Fort Myers
  684 F.2d 750· 11th Cir.· 1982-08-30 ·cited 16×
  A mortgage's future advances clause secures a subsequent note when the note explicitly states it is secured by the mortgage, even if the debts are not of the same kind or class.
• Boyette v. Carden
  347 So. 2d 759· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-06-21 ·cited 16×
  The Boyettes appealed a foreclosure judgment on their farm, arguing that a contemporaneous letter from Ralston Purina modified the mortgage to create a release clause requiring only payment of the $60,000 financed amount rather than the full debt. The appellate court reversed, ho
• Robert C. ROY Agency, Inc. v. Sun First Nat'l Bank of Palm Beach
  468 So. 2d 399· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-04-24 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed a judgment in a replevin action where a bank retained possession of a coin collection pledged as security for multiple loans, including preexisting obligations. The court upheld the validity and enforceability of a 'dragnet clause' that secured all liabilities
• Edward R. Kenneally in Bankr. of Gen. Magnetics, Inc. v. Standard Elecs. Corp. & First Nat'l Bank of Minneapolis
  364 F.2d 642· 8th Cir.· 1966-08-17 ·cited 10×
  The court held that chattel mortgage property descriptions were sufficient under Minnesota law, that attached property qualified as trade fixtures and remained personalty, and that a 'dragnet' clause secured future advances even without actual notice of a subsequent mortgage, pro
• Eugenio Rafael Garrote v. Ocean Bank
  713 So. 2d 1095· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-07-22 ·cited 6×
  A dragnet clause in a residential mortgage does not secure later personal guarantees of business loans if the guarantees are not of the same kind or class as the original mortgage obligation and do not specifically reference the mortgage.
• United Nat'l Bank v. Tellam
  644 So. 2d 97· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-09-07 ·cited 6×
  Dragnet clauses in mortgages do not secure preexisting obligations unless those obligations are specifically identified by name in the mortgage instrument itself. Such identification prevents mortgages from extending to debts not contemplated by the mortgagor and provides accessi
• Regan v. U.S. Small Bus. Admin.
  926 F.2d 1078· 11th Cir.· 1991-03-15 ·cited 6×
  The Regans remain liable under the SBA guaranty because they unconditionally guaranteed repayment, waiving defenses, and the Georgia confirmation statute does not apply to separate debts.
• In re Riss Tanning Corp. v. United States
  468 F.2d 1211· 2d Cir.· 1972-10-27 ·cited 4×
• United States v. Fahrenkamp
  312 F.2d 627· 8th Cir.· 1963-02-01 ·cited 2×
  A chattel mortgage's 'dragnet' clause does not extend to after-acquired property, like loaders, unless the parties clearly intended it and the property is of the same class and related to the primary debt.
• In re Nantahala Vill. v. NCNB Nat'l Bank OF Fla.
  976 F.2d 876· 4th Cir.· 1992-10-02 ·cited 1×
  A party waives its right to appeal issues not objected to in the bankruptcy court's proposed findings, and even if preserved, the substantive claims lack merit under Florida law.
• Steinberg v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
  178 So. 3d 473· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-10-21
  The court held that deferred interest added to the principal of a mortgage note, where the amount was not a computable sum certain at execution, does not trigger the documentary stamp tax under section 201.08(2), Florida Statutes, and the note and mortgage remain enforceable.
• Edrisi v. Sarnoff
  715 So. 2d 1124· Fla. 3d DCA· 1998-08-19
  The Edirisis borrowed money secured by a mortgage and note, and after paying the full judgment amount of $40,347.97, requested a satisfaction of judgment and release of the lis pendens. The lender refused, claiming unpaid attorney's fees and costs under section 57.105 remained du
• Bank OF Kan. v. Nelson Music Co., Inc.
  949 F.2d 321· 10th Cir.· 1991-11-13
  The court held that the dragnet clause in the security agreement was not ambiguous and secured all obligations between Nelson and Kingman Bank, including the guaranty.
• Fla. Nat'l Bank AT Lakeland v. State of Fla. ex rel. the Dep't OF Ins. of the State of Fla.
  350 So. 2d 365· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-09-13
  The court held that the security interest in the collateral did not attach until after July 16, 1974, making the transfer voidable under the insurance code.
• In re Iredale's Ltd. v. Vrooman-Appellee
  476 F.2d 938· 9th Cir.· 1973-03-15
  A dragnet clause in a security agreement is enforceable to cover future indebtedness, including an equipment lease, absent evidence of contrary intent or statutory conflict.