Salam v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n
| Decision Date | 20 December 2017 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D16–1693,4D16–1693 |
| Citation | 233 So.3d 473 |
| Parties | Abdul SALAM and Ghazala K. Salam, Appellants, v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, Successor in Interest to Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Trustee for Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation, Mortgage Pass–Through Certificates, Series 2005–AR13 ; Wells Fargo Bank N.A.; the Town Foundation, Inc.; the Ridges Maintenance Association, Inc.; Any and All Unknown Parties Claiming by, through, Under and Against the Herein Named Individual Defendant(s) Who Are Not Known to be Dead or Alive, whether Said Unknown Parties May Claim an Interest as Spouses, Heirs, Devisees, Grantees, or Other Claimants; Unknown Tenant 1; Unknown Tenant 2; Unknown Tenant 3; and Unknown Tenant 4; the Names Being Fictitious to Account for Parties in Possession, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Chase E. Jenkins of Loan Lawyers, LLC, Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.
Sara F. Holladay–Tobias, C.H. Houston, III, and Monica L. Haddad Forbes of McGuireWoods LLP, Jacksonville, for appellee U.S. Bank National Association, As Trustee, Successor In Interest To Wachovia Bank, National Association, As Trustee For Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation, Mortgage Pass–Through Certificates, Series 2005–AR13.
In this appeal from a foreclosure judgment, Abdul and Ghazala Salam ("the homeowners") argue that the trial court erred in denying their motion for involuntary dismissal and entering a final judgment where the mortgage did not contain a legal description for the property. We find that the plaintiff in the underlying foreclosure suit presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case, and we affirm.
In 2005, Abdul Salam executed a note in favor of the lender, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. The homeowners executed a mortgage securing the note. The mortgage identifies the lender as the mortgagee and provides the property address. The mortgage also contains a stamp reflecting recording information, including a recording date and time, and book and page number references:
In 2014, U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, Successor in Interest to Wachovia Bank, National Association, as Trustee for Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation, Mortgage Pass–Through Certificates, Series 2005–AR13 ("the bank"), brought suit against the homeowners, seeking to foreclose on the mortgage. The bank identified the official records book of Broward County where the mortgage securing the note is recorded: "Official Records Book 39480, at Page 686, of the Public Records of Broward County, Florida."
During trial, the original mortgage was introduced into evidence by the bank. Although the original mortgage referenced an attached legal description, there was no attachment to the original mortgage. An assignment was also introduced into evidence. It provided a legal description for the mortgaged property, and stated that the mortgage was "recorded April 20, 2005 in Official Records Book 39480 at Page 686 of the public records of BROWARD County ...."
After the bank rested, the homeowners moved for involuntary dismissal, arguing that the bank "failed to state a cause of action" in the absence of a legal description in the mortgage. The homeowners further argued that a legal description is necessary to protect third parties: "It could be foreclosing on only part of the actual subject property." The homeowners also pointed out that the bank had not pled a reformation count.
The bank relied on the legal description contained in the assignment. It also argued that the homeowners' argument was waived, as it was not raised as an affirmative defense.
The trial court denied the motion for involuntary dismissal, reasoning that the absence of a legal description was not raised in the homeowners' affirmative defenses.
On appeal, the homeowners first argue that they did raise the absence of a legal description in their affirmative defenses, and that their denial of the bank's allegations was sufficient to require the bank to prove that there was a mortgage on the property. The homeowners also argue that the bank failed to prove a lien existed on the subject property, because the note, mortgage, and modification entered into evidence did not contain a legal description of the property. We need not entertain the homeowners' first argument, as we find that the bank presented a prima facie case.
We review a trial court's ruling on a motion for involuntary dismissal de novo. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co. v. Huber , 137 So.3d 562, 563 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). "To establish a prima facie case, a foreclosure plaintiff must prove: (1) an agreement between the parties; (2) a default by the defendant; (3) acceleration of the debt to maturity; and (4) the amount due." Liberty Home Equity Sol., Inc. v. Raulston , 206 So.3d 58, 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). "In other words, the plaintiff must introduce the subject note and mortgage, an acceleration letter, and some evidence regarding the outstanding debt." Id.
Heartwood 2, LLC v. Dori , 208 So.3d 817, 821 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (citation omitted); see also § 697.02, Fla. Stat. (2014) ().
"Florida courts have repeatedly held descriptions of property in mortgages sufficient despite minor mistakes and irregularities where the description of the property intended to be encumbered could be determined from a review of the entire instrument." Regions Bank v. Deluca , 97 So.3d 879, 884–85 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). As early as 1907, the Florida Supreme Court elaborated on the sufficiency of a property description in a mortgage:
It must be borne in mind that the contest here is directly between the parties to the mortgage. As to the description of the property mortgaged, the rule is ... as follows: ‘As against third persons the mortgage must point out the subject-matter, so that the third person may identify the property covered by the aid of such inquiries as the instrument itself suggests; but between the parties it is only necessary to identify the chattels, so that the mortgagee may say with a reasonable degree of certainty what property is subject to his lien.’
Davis v. Horne , 54 Fla. 563, 45 So. 476, 477 (1907) (citation omitted). There, the mortgaged property was described as "all the following described property, situate, lying, and being in Suwanee [C]ounty, Florida, to wit: All the real estate and timber or timber interest, of whatsoever nature, kind, or description, that is owned by the parties of the first part, or either of them ...." Id. at 477. The mortgage further described specified personal property "together with the farm, and the improvements thereon, that is now owned and that may be hereafter owned by the said parties of the first part in said county during the time that the parties of the first part, or either of them, may be indebted to the party of the second part ...." Id. The Florida Supreme Court found the description was sufficient as to the parties to the mortgage, and that parol evidence was admissible to identify the property. Id.
We can also find guidance in cases involving the sufficiency of property descriptions in deeds. In Mendelson v. Great Western Bank, F.S.B. , 712 So.2d 1194 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), the court summarized our courts' holdings:
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Refaie v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
...description was patently ambiguous because the conveyance was not discernable on the face of the deed), with Salam v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 233 So. 3d 473, 477 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (holding that a mortgage, which did not contain the property's legal description but that contained the names ......
-
Refaie v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
...was patently ambiguous because the conveyance was not discernable on the face of the deed), with Salem v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 233 So. 3d 473, 477 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (holding that a mortgage, which did not contain the property's legal description but that contained the names of the parti......
-
Deutsche Bank, Nat'l Trust Co. v. Quintela
...of the property intended to be encumbered could be determined from a review of the entire instrument." Salam v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n , 233 So.3d 473, 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (quoting Regions Bank v. Deluca , 97 So.3d 879, 884–85 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) ).In this case, the Bank did not intend to......
-
Chapter 6-5 Additional Causes of Action
...(Fla. 1st DCA 2019); Forty One Yellow, LLC v. Escalona, 305 So. 3d 782, 789 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020).[144] Salam v. U.S. Bank, Nat'l Ass'n, 233 So. 3d 473, 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). Reformation may be warranted when "the instrument's description of the property is patently ambiguous, and the instr......
-
Chapter 6-5 Additional Causes of Action
...Procedure and Mielke v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., 264 So. 3d 249, 252-53 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019).[144] Salam v. U.S. Bank, Nat'l Ass'n, 233 So. 3d 473, 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017). Reformation may be warranted when "the instrument's description of the property is patently ambiguous, and the in......