White v. Greymar Associates, LLC
This text of 208 So. 3d 220 (White v. Greymar Associates, LLC) 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.
Opinion
We affirm the trial court’s entry of partial summary judgment, as well as the subsequent final judgment of foreclosure, each entered in favor of appellee, upon its determination that appellee was a bona fide purchaser for value, and because there was no evidence establishing that, at the time appellee acquired its mortgage interest, it had constructive or actual notice of the existence of an unrecorded agreement, upon which appellant relies for the contention that appellant had a previously-acquired and outstanding interest in the property. See § 695.01(1), Fla. Stat. (2008); Gabel v. Drewrys Ltd., U.S.A., Inc., 68 So.2d 372 (Fla.1953); Warner v. Watson, 35 Fla. 402, 17 So. 654 (1895). We also find no error in the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion to stay execution of the final judgment.1
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
208 So. 3d 220, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 16674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-greymar-associates-llc-fladistctapp-2016.