Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Taylor

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Taylor

200 So. 3d 1302, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 15147, 2016 WL 6246566

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 13, 2016

DocketNo. 1D15-5291

StatusPublished

This text of 200 So. 3d 1302 (Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Taylor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Branch Banking & Trust Co. v. Taylor, 200 So. 3d 1302, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 15147, 2016 WL 6246566 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

WOLF, J.

In this mortgage foreclosure action, the trial court granted appellant’s motion for summary judgment but awarded appellant only the past due amount and not the accelerated amount of appellee Edra Taylor’s note and mortgage.

Appellant alleges the trial court erroneously believed appellant was required to specifically plead that all conditions precedent to acceleration had occurred in order to be awarded the accelerated amount of damages. Even if such a requirement exists, counsel for appellee conceded that appellant had completed all conditions precedent to requesting the accelerated amount.

Therefore, we REVERSE and REMAND for the trial court to grant appellant’s motion for summary judgment and award appellant both the past due amount and the accelerated amount of appellee’s note and mortgage.

LEWIS and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

WOLF, J.

In this mortgage foreclosure action, the trial court granted appellant’s motion for summary judgment but awarded appellant only the past due amount and not the accelerated amount of appellee Edra Taylor’s note and mortgage.

Appellant alleges the trial court erroneously believed appellant was required to specifically plead that all conditions precedent to acceleration had occurred in order to be awarded the accelerated amount of damages. Even if such a requirement exists, counsel for appellee conceded that appellant had completed all conditions precedent to requesting the accelerated amount.

Therefore, we REVERSE and REMAND for the trial court to grant appellant’s motion for summary judgment and award appellant both the past due amount and the accelerated amount of appellee’s note and mortgage.

LEWIS and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 So. 3d 1302, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 15147, 2016 WL 6246566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/branch-banking-trust-co-v-taylor-fladistctapp-2016.