![]() Bank’s counsel failed to appear at a case management conference. The case was dismissed with prejudice on after U.S. Bank”), filed suit to foreclose on May 16, 2006. In Bartram, a borrower defaulted on his mortgage loan by failing to remit payment for the month of January 2006 and the mortgagee, U.S. The Court ultimately held that where a mortgagee’s prior foreclosure action was dismissed with prejudice, its subsequent foreclosure case is not barred by the statute of limitations so long as (1) the newly alleged default date post-dates the dismissal of the first action and (2) the subsequent lawsuit is filed within five years of the newly alleged default date. ![]() Bank, N.A., SC14-1265, which provided some clarity to the issue but left plenty to parse. On November 3, 2016, the Florida Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Bartram v. However, the question of how to apply the statute of limitations in subsequent mortgage foreclosure cases where the mortgagee’s prior foreclosure suit was dismissed has been the subject of significant litigation and scholarly debate in Florida for almost a decade. ![]() At first glance, this seems fairly cut and dry. ![]() Action Item: If a prior foreclosure action has been dismissed with prejudice, mortgagees may bring new actions to foreclose on mortgages based upon post-dismissal payment default, so long as the new action is brought within five years of the new default.įlorida Statute section § 95.11(2)(c) states that the statute of limitations to foreclose a mortgage is five years. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |