Equibank, N.A. v. Penland

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Equibank, N.A. v. Penland

344 So. 2d 629

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 13, 1977

DocketNo. Y-190

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 344 So. 2d 629 (Equibank, N.A. v. Penland) 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

Equibank, N.A. v. Penland, 344 So. 2d 629 (Fla. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Equibank (appellant-plaintiff) appeals a final judgment granting judgment on the pleadings. We reverse.

Suit was instituted by Equibank seeking foreclosure of a mortgage against the Pen-lands (appellees) and others. Penland, et ux., in their answer, alleged lack of consideration, consent, ratification, and estoppel. Equibank did not reply to the foregoing affirmative defenses. The trial court granted Penlands’ motion for judgment on the pleadings, citing American Salvage and Jobbing Co., Inc. v. Salomon, 295 So.2d 710 (Fla.3rd DCA 1974).

The subject answer did not require a reply merely to deny the allegations of the defense. Allegations as to which no responsive pleadings is required shall be taken as denied. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.110(a) Moore Meats, Inc. v. Strawn, In & For Seminole Cty., 313 So.2d 660 (Fla.1975).

The Penlands’ cross-assignment of error challenging the trial court’s order denying their motion to quash service of process is without merit.

Reversed and remanded.

RAWLS, Acting C. J., and MILLS and SMITH, JJ., concur.

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