Tidewater Estates Co-Op, Inc. v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Tidewater Estates Co-Op, Inc. v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n

83 So. 3d 912, 2012 WL 638029, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 3259

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 29, 2012

DocketNo. 4D11-1999

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 83 So. 3d 912 (Tidewater Estates Co-Op, Inc. v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n) 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

Tidewater Estates Co-Op, Inc. v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n, 83 So. 3d 912, 2012 WL 638029, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 3259 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s order sequestering rents. See Whud Real Estate Ltd. P’ship v. Oak Grove, Ltd., 699 So.2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Lack of standing is an affirmative defense to foreclosure. See, e.g., Glynn v. First Union Nat’l Bank, 912 So.2d 357, 358 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Section 697.07(4), Florida Statutes (2011), provides that a court may order sequestration of rents “notwithstanding any asserted defenses or counterclaims of the mortgagor.” In ruling on a motion to sequester rents, a court should refrain from conclusively ruling on affirmative defenses. See Whetstone P’ship v. Gen. Elec. Capital Corp., 666 So.2d 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).

Affirmed.

GROSS, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We find no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s order sequestering rents. See Whud Real Estate Ltd. P’ship v. Oak Grove, Ltd., 699 So.2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Lack of standing is an affirmative defense to foreclosure. See, e.g., Glynn v. First Union Nat’l Bank, 912 So.2d 357, 358 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Section 697.07(4), Florida Statutes (2011), provides that a court may order sequestration of rents “notwithstanding any asserted defenses or counterclaims of the mortgagor.” In ruling on a motion to sequester rents, a court should refrain from conclusively ruling on affirmative defenses. See Whetstone P’ship v. Gen. Elec. Capital Corp., 666 So.2d 194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995).

Affirmed.

GROSS, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 So. 3d 912, 2012 WL 638029, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 3259, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tidewater-estates-co-op-inc-v-us-bank-national-assn-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack