Hance v. Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hance v. Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB

678 So. 2d 11, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8800, 1996 WL 469177

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 20, 1996

DocketNo. 95-2978

StatusPublished

This text of 678 So. 2d 11 (Hance v. Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB) 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

Hance v. Dime Savings Bank of New York, FSB, 678 So. 2d 11, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8800, 1996 WL 469177 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from summary judgment in favor of Appellee in its suit to foreclose on a note and mortgage executed by Appellant. Our review of the record indicates that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether the note was in default. See § 702.01, Florida Statutes; Cross v. Federal Nat’l Mortgage Ass’n, 359 So.2d 464 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) (mortgage foreclosure is an equitable action); Campbell v. Werner, 232 So.2d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Stephens v. Dichtenmueller, 216 So.2d 448 (Fla.1968) (great caution should be exercised in any summary judgment proceeding denying the litigant ample opportunity to demonstrate that he is entitled to the benefit of trial); Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666 (Fla.1985) (every inference is drawn in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought). We therefore REVERSE and REMAND for further proceedings.

BOOTH, BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us on appeal from summary judgment in favor of Appellee in its suit to foreclose on a note and mortgage executed by Appellant. Our review of the record indicates that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether the note was in default. See § 702.01, Florida Statutes; Cross v. Federal Nat’l Mortgage Ass’n, 359 So.2d 464 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) (mortgage foreclosure is an equitable action); Campbell v. Werner, 232 So.2d 252 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Stephens v. Dichtenmueller, 216 So.2d 448 (Fla.1968) (great caution should be exercised in any summary judgment proceeding denying the litigant ample opportunity to demonstrate that he is entitled to the benefit of trial); Moore v. Morris, 475 So.2d 666 (Fla.1985) (every inference is drawn in favor of the party against whom summary judgment is sought). We therefore REVERSE and REMAND for further proceedings.

BOOTH, BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

678 So. 2d 11, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8800, 1996 WL 469177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hance-v-dime-savings-bank-of-new-york-fsb-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack