Harrington v. Tolar

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Harrington v. Tolar

164 So. 3d 1284, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9018, 2015 WL 3645929

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 12, 2015

DocketNo. 2D14-4768

StatusPublished

This text of 164 So. 3d 1284 (Harrington v. Tolar) 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

Harrington v. Tolar, 164 So. 3d 1284, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9018, 2015 WL 3645929 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

BLACK, Judge.

Keith Harrington challenges the final summary judgment of foreclosure entered in favor of Anthony Tolar. Because the contract does not contain an acceleration clause, the trial court erroneously accelerated the balance due. See Adkinson v. Nyberg, 344 So.2d 614, 615-16 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). At oral argument, Mr. Tolar conceded error.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to vacate the final summary judgment of foreclosure and to consider a renewed motion for summary judgment, consistent with this opinion. On remand Mr. Tolar may amend his pleading to claim any sums then due under the contract, and Mr. Harrington may appropriately amend his answer. Any judgment shall be subject to the contract terms and Mr. Harrington’s right to redeem under section 45.0315, Florida Statutes (2014).

Reversed and remanded.

NORTHCUTT and KELLY, JJ., Concur.

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