Real Property and Business Litigation Report
Volume VII, Issue 51
December 20, 2014
Hilton Hotels Corp. v. Anderson, — So.3d —-, 2014 WL 7191042 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014).
Even though the name of the defendant was inserted in the title of the document, the phrase “PLAINTIFF agrees to settle any and all claims asserted against [Defendant]” without entering the name of the specific Defendant to whom the proposal was made rendered the proposal for settlement unenforceable as it was not clear which of the multiple defendants was being addressed in the specific phrase.
In re Amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Admin. 2.420, — So.3d —-, 2014 WL 7178909 (Fla. 2014).
Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.420 is amended to permit public access to court records subject to the security matrix outlined in Florida Supreme Court Administrative Order 14-19.
Montreux at Deerwood Lake Condominium Ass’n, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., — So.3d —-, 2014 WL 7183213 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
A foreclosing party may not, post-judgment, seek to determine the amounts due a condominium association by moving to “enforce” a foreclosure judgment (which did not mention association assessments) more than six months after judgment.
Hound Mounds, Inc. v. Finch, — So.3d —-, 2014 WL 7150482 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014).
A challenge to the entire agreement (which contains an arbitration clause) must be made to the arbitrator; a challenge as to the arbitration clause alone is to the court.
Great American Ins. Co. of New York v. 2000 Island Blvd. Condominium Ass’n, Inc., — So.3d —-, 2014 WL 7156894 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
A trial judge who tells a defendant to “fork over the money” has abandoned their neutrality, and cannot continue to preside over the case.
Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas v. Beauvais, — So.3d —-, 2014 WL 7156961 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014).
Dismissal of a foreclosure complaint without prejudice does not decelerate the loan and stop the running of the statute of limitations, distinguishing U.S. Bank Nat. Ass’n. v. Bartram, 140 So.3d 1007 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) review granted, Bartram v. U.S. Bank Nat. Ass’n, Nos. SC14–1265, SC14–1266, SC14–1305 (Fla. Sept. 11, 2014).
Ezem v. Federal Nat. Mortg., — So.3d —-, 2014 WL 7094295 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014).
A husband is permitted to intervene in the foreclosure of his wife’s home, even if he did not sign the note and mortgage, because foreclosure affects his homestead rights.
U.S. Bank Nat. Ass’n v. Farhood, — So.3d —-, 2014 WL 7095306 (Fla 1st DCA 2014).
A trial court may not sanction a party by altering that party’s lien priorities as doing so impermissibly alters the statutory framework for lien priorities.
Kolodziej v. Mason, — F.3d —-, 2014 WL 7180962 (11th Cir. 2014).
A criminal defense attorney’s televised statement that “I challenge anybody to show me—I’ll pay them a million dollars if they can [arrive at the Atlanta airport and travel to a specific hotel all within 28 minutes]” is not, under the circumstances which it was made, an offer that could be accepted.