LPP Mortgage Ltd. v. Bank of America, NA
| Decision Date | 18 September 2002 |
| Docket Number | No. 3D01-3578.,3D01-3578. |
| Citation | 826 So.2d 462 |
| Parties | LPP MORTGAGE LTD., etc., Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Roger D. Bear, P.A., and John B. St. Lawrence (Orlando), for appellant.
Nixon and Associates, P.A., and Victor H. Veschio (Tampa), for appellee.
Before JORGENSON, FLETCHER, and RAMIREZ, JJ.
LPP Mortgage, Ltd. (LPP) appeals from an order granting the plaintiff's motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540 and an order denying the defendant's motion for rehearing. We affirm.
Bank of America initiated a foreclosure proceeding against the real property owner and the junior lienholders including appellant LPP Mortgage. Prior to Bank of America filing its Motion for Summary Judgment and the affidavit in support of the motion, LPP requested payoff and reinstatement figures. Bank of America provided the figures and specifically referenced the advancement and payment of $9,459.64 in real estate taxes, which Bank of America paid to the Miami-Dade Tax Collector in January 2001. Bank of America's motion for summary judgment was granted and the foreclosure sale was set. However, before the foreclosure sale, it was determined that the final summary judgment did not include the $9,459 in taxes paid by Bank of America because that amount was mistakenly omitted from the affidavit in support of Bank of America's motion for summary judgment. Accordingly, the Bank of America representative who attended the foreclosure sale brought a revised affidavit reflecting the cost of the tax payment and post-judgment interest on that amount. At the foreclosure sale, LPP opened its bid at $1.00 over the total amount due to Bank of America, including the tax payment. LPP purchased the property with the high bid. However, the sale attendee failed to file the revised affidavit. Bank of America did not discover the attendee's failure until after it received its disbursement check, which did not include the taxes paid.
Bank of America filed a Motion for Relief from Judgment pursuant to Rule 1.540, alleging that LPP had actual and constructive knowledge of the tax payment, yet remained silent in order to obtain a windfall from Bank of America's mistake. The court granted the motion and ruled that LPP could reimburse Bank of America for the taxes paid or the foreclosure judgment would be set aside, LPP would be fully reimbursed, and a new sale date would be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lyon v. Sanford, 1D03-4621.
...of Ga., 639 So.2d 161, 162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (appellant must show an "abuse of discretion"). See also LPP Mortgage Ltd. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 826 So.2d 462, 463-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) ("Whether relief should be granted pursuant to Rule 1.540 is a fact specific question and the trial court'......
-
Jain v. Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC
...abused its discretion in denying Jain and Murphy's motion for relief from judgment under rule 1.540. SeeLPP Mortg. Ltd. v. Bank of America, N.A., 826 So. 2d 462, 463–64 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (applying gross abuse of discretion standard in reviewing trial court's ruling on a motion for relief f......
-
Rodriguez v. Falcones
...3d 39, 41 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019) ; Bequer v. Nat'l City Bank, 46 So. 3d 1199, 1201 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) ; LPP Mortg. Ltd. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 826 So. 2d 462, 463–64 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (applying gross abuse of discretion standard in reviewing trial court's ruling on a motion for relief from ju......
-
In re Guardianship of Schiavo, 2D02-5394.
...that an appellate court cannot reverse such an order absent a showing of a gross abuse of discretion. LPP Mortgage Ltd. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 826 So.2d 462, 463-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Tilden Groves Holding Corp. v. Orlando/ Orange County Expressway, 816 So.2d 658 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); see al......