U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Wellman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Wellman

215 So. 3d 1280, 2017 WL 1363943, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5076

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 12, 2017

Docket3D15-1368

StatusPublished

This text of 215 So. 3d 1280 (U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Wellman) 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

U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Wellman, 215 So. 3d 1280, 2017 WL 1363943, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5076 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

EMAS, J.

U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. appeals from a final judgment involuntarily dismissing its foreclosure complaint, upon the trial court’s determination that the lender failed to comply with conditions precedent prior to filing its foreclosure lawsuit. Specifically, the trial court determined that the lender’s 1 notice of default and intent to accelerate failed to comply with paragraph 22 of the mortgage agreement. Upon our de novo review, Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Craig, 193 So.3d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016), we find that the notice substantially complied with paragraph 22 of the mortgage.

The relevant facts of the instant case are indistinguishable from those in our recent decisions in Craig, 193 So.3d at 77; Bank of New York v. Mieses, 187 So.3d 919 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Bank of America v. Cadet, 183 So.3d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Suntrust Mortgage, Inc. v. Garcia, 186 So.3d 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); and Bank of New York Mellon v. Nunez, 180 So.3d 160 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015). In those cases we held (as we hold in the instant case) that the notice of default substantially complied with the default notice provision contained in paragraph 22 of the mortgage. We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

1

. U.S. Bank was substituted in as party plaintiff during the proceedings below.

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

EMAS, J.

U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. appeals from a final judgment involuntarily dismissing its foreclosure complaint, upon the trial court’s determination that the lender failed to comply with conditions precedent prior to filing its foreclosure lawsuit. Specifically, the trial court determined that the lender’s 1 notice of default and intent to accelerate failed to comply with paragraph 22 of the mortgage agreement. Upon our de novo review, Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Craig, 193 So.3d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016), we find that the notice substantially complied with paragraph 22 of the mortgage.

The relevant facts of the instant case are indistinguishable from those in our recent decisions in Craig, 193 So.3d at 77; Bank of New York v. Mieses, 187 So.3d 919 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Bank of America v. Cadet, 183 So.3d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Suntrust Mortgage, Inc. v. Garcia, 186 So.3d 1036 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); and Bank of New York Mellon v. Nunez, 180 So.3d 160 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015). In those cases we held (as we hold in the instant case) that the notice of default substantially complied with the default notice provision contained in paragraph 22 of the mortgage. We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

1

. U.S. Bank was substituted in as party plaintiff during the proceedings below.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 So. 3d 1280, 2017 WL 1363943, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 5076, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/us-bank-trust-na-v-wellman-fladistctapp-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack