Jeff-Ray Corp. v. Jacobson

Decision Date12 September 1990
Docket NumberJEFF-RAY,88-3363,Nos. 88-2594,s. 88-2594
CitationJeff-Ray Corp. v. Jacobson, 566 So.2d 885 (Fla. App. 1990)
Parties15 Fla. L. Weekly D2278 CORPORATION, Appellant, v. James Cary JACOBSON, Bruce M. Gottlieb and Mary E. Jacobson, Appellees.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Oliver Addison Parker of Law Office of Oliver Addison Parker, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Charles A. Finkel of Jacobson and Associates, Hollywood, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final summary judgment entered in favor of the plaintiffs in this mortgage foreclosure.The appellant made an unrebutted showing that it did not receive notice of the summary judgment motion or hearing until receipt of the judgment itself.It was an abuse of discretion for the trial court to deny appellant's motion for relief and rehearing.The appellant has shown the likelihood that substantial prejudice may occur if not allowed to rebut and show misrepresentation or mistake in the amount due, which is substantially at variance with the defendant's claimed amortization.

We recognize that an apparent prior lack of diligence in the defense may have influenced the trial court decision on the motion for rehearing.However, in the absence of findings or any rebuttal of the appellant's affidavits, the motion for rehearing should have been granted.We note that the defendants' motion was filed immediately upon receipt of the court order.Cf.Zimmerman v. Vinylgrain Indus., 464 So.2d 1353(Fla. 1st DCA1985);Lacore v. Giralda Bake Shop, Inc., 407 So.2d 275(Fla. 3d DCA1981).See alsoOkeechobee Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Barnett Bank, 434 So.2d 334(Fla. 4th DCA1983).

We also reverse and remand on the second point raised by appellant; that is, that the trial court erred in denying defendant's March 9, 1988, motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action.Appellees' complaint for mortgage foreclosure was filed on January 4, 1988, and alleged an assignment of the subject mortgage to them in 1986.However, it was not attached to the complaint.When the alleged assignment was finally produced, it was dated April 18, 1988, some four months after the lawsuit was filed.

Our opinion in Safeco Insurance Co. v. Ware, 401 So.2d 1129(Fla. 4th DCA1981), would support dismissal of the action based on failure to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.130.Given the scenario before us, appellees' complaint could not have stated a cause of action at the time it was filed, based on a document that did not exist until...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
18 cases
  • U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Ibanez
    • United States
    • Appeals Court of Massachusetts
    • January 7, 2011
    ...mortgage after the entry and foreclosure sale does not satisfy the Massachusetts statute”). 18 See also Jeff-Ray Corp. v. Jacobson, 566 So.2d 885, 886 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1990) (per curiam) (foreclosure action could not be based on assignment of mortgage dated four months after commencement of......
  • MSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC v. Qbe Holdings, Inc., No. 19-11759
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eleventh Circuit
    • July 15, 2020
    ...to sue executed "after the lawsuit was filed" may not give the assignee a valid cause of action. See Jeff-Ray Corp. v. Jacobson, 566 So. 2d 885, 886 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (per curiam) (emphasis omitted). It thus makes sense that the USAA court limited its examination of the Nunc Pro Tunc Assi......
  • Ohio State Bar Ass'n v. Resnick.
    • United States
    • Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts
    • December 21, 2010
    ...mortgage after the entry and foreclosure sale does not satisfy the Massachusetts statute”).18 See also Jeff–Ray Corp. v. Jacobson, 566 So.2d 885, 886 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1990) (per curiam) (foreclosure action could not be based on assignment of mortgage dated four months after commencement of ......
  • Golf Club of Plantation, Inc. v. City of Plantation
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • September 16, 1998
    ...ruling comes clothed with a presumption of correctness and shall not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion. Jeff-Ray Corp. v. Jacobson, 566 So.2d 885 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution provides "nor shall private property be taken for public use,......
  • Get Started for Free
1 firm's commentaries
1 books & journal articles
  • Business & commercial cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Florida Causes of Action
    • April 1, 2022
    ...Commercial Code to establish that it was the lawful holder of the note, entitled to enforce its terms”). 2. Jeff-Ray Corp. v. Jacobson , 566 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (the court upheld a dismissal of a complaint of foreclosure that could not have stated a cause of action at the time it......