Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A.
Decision Date | 27 August 2014 |
Docket Number | No. 4D13–2236.,4D13–2236. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Parties | EVERGRENE PARTNERS, INC., Appellant, v. CITIBANK, N.A., as Trustee, JPMorgan Clearing Corp., as Successor in Interest to Bear Stearns Residential Mortgage Corporation, JPMorgan Chase & Co., and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., Appellees. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Richard E. Retamar of Retamar & Millian, P.A., Deerfield Beach, for appellant.
Catherine C. Grieve and Alejandro M. Cura of Rivero Mestre LLP, Miami, for appellees.
Appellant, Evergrene Partners, challenges the dismissal of its complaint to cancel two mortgages held by appellee, Citibank, on property owned by Evergrene. While appellant alleged that the statute of limitations had run on any right to foreclose on the mortgages, thus requiring the cancellation of the mortgages, the trial court disagreed. We agree with the trial court that appellant is not entitled to the cancellation of the mortgages, because the statute of limitations has not run on the enforcement of the mortgages.
In 2006, mortgagors executed two notes and mortgages on their property, which notes and mortgages were acquired by Citibank. The mortgagors defaulted on the notes, and Citibank filed suit to foreclose in August 2007, alleging a default in the payments and accelerating the balance due. Litigation continued, but in May 2012, Citibank filed a voluntary dismissal of the complaint. Shortly thereafter, the mortgagors transferred the property by quit-claim deed to Evergrene Partners.
Thereafter, Evergrene filed a complaint for cancellation of the mortgages on the property. It alleged that the five-year statute of limitations had run on their enforcement; therefore, as the mortgages were no longer enforceable, they became a cloud on Evergrene's title.
Citibank filed a motion to dismiss the quiet title action arguing inter alia that section 95.281(1), Florida Statutes (2012), provides in part that:
(1) The lien of a mortgage or other instrument encumbering real property, herein called mortgage, ... shall terminate after the expiration of the following periods of time:
(a) If the final maturity of an obligation secured by a mortgage is ascertainable from the record of it, 5 years after the date of maturity.
Both mortgages reflected a maturity date of April 1, 2036. Citibank argued the mortgage liens did not terminate until 2041, which would be five years after the maturity date of the loans. The trial court agreed with this argument and dismissed the quiet title action, prompting this appeal. We review de novo the dismissal of a complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Acad. Express, LLC v. Broward Cnty., 53 So.3d 1188, 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).
While a foreclosure action with an acceleration of the debt may bar a subsequent foreclosure action based on the same event of default, it does not bar subsequent actions and acceleration based upon different events of default. See Singleton v. Greymar Assocs., 882 So.2d 1004, 1008 (Fla.2004) ( ); see also Star Funding Solutions, LLC v. Krondes, 101 So.3d 403 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Therefore, the statute of limitations has not run on all of the payments due pursuant to the note, and the mortgage is still enforceable based upon subsequent acts of default.
Kaan v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 981 F.Supp.2d 1271 (S.D.Fla.2013), presents a case virtually identical to this case. There, Wells Fargo had...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Deutsche Bank Trust Co. v. Beauvais, 3D14–575.
...So.2d 1004 (Fla.2004), applicable to the instant action, and that it mandates reversal. See Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., 143 So.3d 954, 956 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (applying Singleton and concluding that the statute of limitations would not bar foreclosure of an accelerated loan ......
-
Bartram v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n
...to reinstate it via a notice of ‘deceleration’ or otherwise."With reasoning similar to Beauvais, in Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., 143 So.3d 954, 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014), a mortgagor challenged, on statute of limitations grounds, a second foreclosure action brought by the mortg......
-
Bank of Am., N.A. v. Graybush, 4D17-1256
...is not an adjudication on the merits and therefore will not support a claim of res judicata. " Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A. , 143 So.3d 954, 956 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). Accordingly, "after the dismissal, the parties are simply placed back in the same contractual relationship as b......
-
Stern v. Bank of Am. Corp.
...right in the mortgagee to accelerate payment on the note in a subsequent foreclosure action."); Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., 143 So.3d 954, 956 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (where a prior foreclosure action was dismissed without prejudice, "any acts of default still within the statute......
-
Chapter 3-2 Statute of Limitations
...v. Georgia Notes 18, LLC, 182 So. 3d 876 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (emphasis added) (quoting Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., 143 So. 3d 954, 955-56 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). "[T]he suit must still be based on an act of default within the five-year statute of limitations period." Hicks v. W......
-
Chapter 3-2 Statute of Limitations
...v. Georgia Notes 18, LLC, 182 So. 3d 876 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (emphasis added) (quoting Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., 143 So. 3d 954, 955-56 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). "[T]he suit must still be based on an act of default within the five-year statute of limitations period." Hicks v. W......