Droege v. Security & Investment Corp. of the Palm Beaches

468 So. 2d 539, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1231, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14195
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 15, 1985·No. No. 84-413·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find that neither Peoples Mortgage Company nor Security and Investment Corporation of the Palm Beaches were holders in due course; and that appellants’ defenses should have been tried or pled, together with any reply thereto by appellee, Security. We reverse and remand with direction to retry the case, considering appellants’ defenses and appellee’s reply thereto. The trial court may consider amendments to pleadings by either party upon remand, should either desire to have same considered.

HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

Droege v. Security & Investment Corp. of the Palm Beaches, 468 So. 2d 539, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1231, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14195 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

468 So. 2d 539 (Droege v. Security & Investment Corp. of the Palm Beaches) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Security & Investment Corp. of the Palm Beaches v. Droege
529 So. 2d 799 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
SECURITY & INV. CORP., PALM BEACHES v. Droege
529 So. 2d 799 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)