Real Property and Business Litigation Report
Volume VIII, Issue 26
June 27, 2015
Letchworth v. Pannone, — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3903536 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015).
Certiorari lies to review trial court orders compelling the disclosure of confidential or privileged information, including information of third parties.
Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Berdecia, — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3903568 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015).
A witness must lay the foundation to testify as to business records, but witnesses in mortgage foreclosure cases need not be the person who entered the information into the records nor need they identify the person who entered the data into the records.
Eagles Master Ass’, Inc. v. Bank of America, N.A., — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3915871 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).
A lender can prove standing, even if it has lost the note, by filing a copy of the indorsement or assignment together with a copy of the lost note when filing suit.
HJH, L.L.C. v. Volusia County, — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3915930 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015).
Appellate review of a trial court’s decision on boundary lines is de novo when the trial court decision is based on interpretation of plats and deeds.
ATC Logistics Corp. v. Jackson, — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3917424 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
Disqualification of opposing appellate counsel is required if counsel represented the other side in the trial court as an associate.
Blue Lagoon Development, LLC v. Maury, — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3875437 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).
Unless solely for the payment of money or time is the material part, a contract lacking a “time of the essence” provision is not breached by failure to perform on its due date.
Double Park, LLC v. Kaine Parking 125, LLC, — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3875457 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).
The trial court must hold an evidentiary hearing to determine dollar amounts that might be due if a triple-net lease requires additional payments for monies received by the tenant from subtenants in excess of those owed to the main landlord
Teitelbaum v. South Florida Water Management Dist., — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3875464 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).
“Condemnation blight” is relevant to the valuation of property that has already been taken but does not apply to de facto takings claims; any diminution in value due to condemnation blight is awarded at the time of the actual taking.
Loper v. Weather Shield Mfg., Inc., — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3875549 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
An oral promise to not sue in exchange for new house windows reaching the end of their warranty period is enforceable and not illusory as it supported by consideration (an agreement to not sue) and definite in time (the upcoming end of the warranty period). Any application of the Statute of Frauds is limited by equitable estoppel.
Silver Shells Corp. v. St. Maarten at Silver Shells Condominium Ass’n, Inc., — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3875556 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
The five-year statute of limitations for condominium associations to bring actions to recover property improperly removed by the developer begins to run on turnover of the association, not the date of removal of the property.
Channell v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co., — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3875949 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).
A foreclosing lender’s mere reliance on a previous servicer’s records is, without more, insufficient to establish the predicate for the Business Records Exception to the Hearsay Rule. A subsequent lender may lay the foundation by independently establishing the accuracy of the records (per WAMCO XXVIII, Ltd. v. Integrated Electronic Environments, Inc., 903 So.2d 230 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)) or reviewing the records for accuracy prior to integrating the prior records into the lender’s own records (Bank of N.Y. v. Calloway, 157 So.3d 1064 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)).
Bennett v. Walton County, — So.3d —-, 2015 WL 3824197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).
Substantive due process challenges to zoning regulations are reviewed under the rational basis test. Prohibiting the use of residential property for paid events is “facially” permissible, and “as applied” permissible as the term “non-residential” sufficiently conveys the restriction imposed by the local government.
Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., — S.Ct. —-, 2015 WL 2473449 (2015).
Disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 3604(a), 3605(a).
Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, — S.Ct. —-, 2015 WL 2473380 (2015).
A patent holder cannot charge royalties after the patent term expires.
Horne v. Department of Agriculture, — S.Ct. —-, 2015 WL 2473384 (2015).
The Taking Clause of the United States Constitution applies to personal as well as real property.
Tartell v. South Florida Sinus and Allergy Center, Inc., — F.3d —-, 2015 WL 3857338 (11th Cir. 2015).
There is no Lanham Act violation for cybersquatting and unfair competition arising out the use of a name in a website unless the name has acquired secondary meaning.