Kennedy v. Kay

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kennedy v. Kay

154 So. 2d 345, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3311

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 28, 1963

DocketNo. 63-128

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 154 So. 2d 345 (Kennedy v. Kay) 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

Kennedy v. Kay, 154 So. 2d 345, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3311 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a post decretal order which denied a deficiency decree, in a suit for foreclosure of a third mortgage on certain real estate. The amount due under the decree was $11,388.67. The property involved was bought in on the foreclosure sale by the plaintiff-mortgagee for $7,000 subject to two prior mortgages on which the unpaid balance aggregated $41,-200, leaving a deficiency sum of $4,388.67. There was evidence that the equity in the property, that is, the value above the outstanding mortgage indebtednesses was in excess of $27,000. This and other facts and circumstances disclosed on the record were sufficient to justify denial of the motion for deficiency decree. See Kissling v. McCarthy, Fla.App.1958, 100 So.2d 434. Compare Carlson v. Becker, Fla.1950, 45 So.2d 116; Houk v. Weiner, Fla.1951, 53 So.2d 304.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a post decretal order which denied a deficiency decree, in a suit for foreclosure of a third mortgage on certain real estate. The amount due under the decree was $11,388.67. The property involved was bought in on the foreclosure sale by the plaintiff-mortgagee for $7,000 subject to two prior mortgages on which the unpaid balance aggregated $41,-200, leaving a deficiency sum of $4,388.67. There was evidence that the equity in the property, that is, the value above the outstanding mortgage indebtednesses was in excess of $27,000. This and other facts and circumstances disclosed on the record were sufficient to justify denial of the motion for deficiency decree. See Kissling v. McCarthy, Fla.App.1958, 100 So.2d 434. Compare Carlson v. Becker, Fla.1950, 45 So.2d 116; Houk v. Weiner, Fla.1951, 53 So.2d 304.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 So. 2d 345, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kennedy-v-kay-fladistctapp-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack