Bush v. Fiore

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bush v. Fiore

899 So. 2d 1144, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3063, 2005 WL 545255

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 9, 2005

DocketNo. 4D02-1376

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 899 So. 2d 1144 (Bush v. Fiore) 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

Bush v. Fiore, 899 So. 2d 1144, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3063, 2005 WL 545255 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case arose out of appellants’ purchase of a home. In their thirteen-count sixth amended complaint, they contended that various people involved in the sale made misrepresentations to them concerning the patio and pool’s encroachment upon utility easements. Appellants lost the house in a foreclosure proceeding. The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of appellees on the ground that appellants had no standing to proceed because they had lost their interest in the home as a result of the foreclosure.

We reverse. Even though they no longer owned the property, appellants had standing to proceed on their damage claims. Poinciana Mobile Home Park, Inc. v. Key West Villas Mobile Homeowners Ass’n., 622 So.2d 185 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), is not controlling because it does not indicate the nature of the lawsuit giving rise to the appeal, which the third district dismissed as moot. Reversing on the standing issue alone, we express no opinion as to the viability of any cause of action stated in the sixth amended complaint.

KLEIN, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This case arose out of appellants’ purchase of a home. In their thirteen-count sixth amended complaint, they contended that various people involved in the sale made misrepresentations to them concerning the patio and pool’s encroachment upon utility easements. Appellants lost the house in a foreclosure proceeding. The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of appellees on the ground that appellants had no standing to proceed because they had lost their interest in the home as a result of the foreclosure.

We reverse. Even though they no longer owned the property, appellants had standing to proceed on their damage claims. Poinciana Mobile Home Park, Inc. v. Key West Villas Mobile Homeowners Ass’n., 622 So.2d 185 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), is not controlling because it does not indicate the nature of the lawsuit giving rise to the appeal, which the third district dismissed as moot. Reversing on the standing issue alone, we express no opinion as to the viability of any cause of action stated in the sixth amended complaint.

KLEIN, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

899 So. 2d 1144, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3063, 2005 WL 545255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bush-v-fiore-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack