Wilson v. Southern Discount Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wilson v. Southern Discount Co.

385 So. 2d 169, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 17016

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 1, 1980

DocketNo. 79-1884

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 385 So. 2d 169 (Wilson v. Southern Discount Co.) 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

Wilson v. Southern Discount Co., 385 So. 2d 169, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 17016 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The final judgment of foreclosure, which is under review by this appeal and cross-appeal, is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) all the necessary pre-conditions to the subject foreclosure are shown on this record, (b) the appellee Southern Discount Company [the holder of a second mortgage on the subject realty] is not liable in trespass to the appellant John Wilson [the joint owner of the subject realty] for entering upon and managing the subject realty because the appellee did so with the acquiescence and consent of the appellant and the other joint owner of the subject realty under circumstances which adequately protected the interests of both joint owners, thus taking this case out of the rule stated in Bartley v. Church, 347 So.2d 838 (Fla.2d DCA 1977), and (c) the other errors urged on the appeal and cross-appeal have no merit. See Pros-ser on Torts § 13 (4th ed. 1971); 32 Fla.Jur. “Trespass” § 9 (1960).

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

PER CURIAM.

The final judgment of foreclosure, which is under review by this appeal and cross-appeal, is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) all the necessary pre-conditions to the subject foreclosure are shown on this record, (b) the appellee Southern Discount Company [the holder of a second mortgage on the subject realty] is not liable in trespass to the appellant John Wilson [the joint owner of the subject realty] for entering upon and managing the subject realty because the appellee did so with the acquiescence and consent of the appellant and the other joint owner of the subject realty under circumstances which adequately protected the interests of both joint owners, thus taking this case out of the rule stated in Bartley v. Church, 347 So.2d 838 (Fla.2d DCA 1977), and (c) the other errors urged on the appeal and cross-appeal have no merit. See Pros-ser on Torts § 13 (4th ed. 1971); 32 Fla.Jur. “Trespass” § 9 (1960).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

385 So. 2d 169, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 17016, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilson-v-southern-discount-co-fladistctapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack