Skip to Content

Real Property, Title Insurance, & Financial Services Update: Week Ending November 28, 2025

Last week, there were a few per curiam affirmances in Florida that reinforce important principles for those litigating in the real property space, as well as some decisions in the landlord-tenant context. Additionally, a Fourth Circuit opinion touched on the purpose of a title insurance policy in determining whether a lender was on the hook for aiding and abetting a fraudulent scheme when it funded a loan.

  • Unless an assignee agrees otherwise, an assignment typically involves only an assignee’s acquisition of rights under a contract, not the assignor’s obligations (Festival Fun Parks LLC v. Oceaneering International Inc.)
  • Section 83.60(2), Florida Statutes, requires a tenant to pay rent into the court registry, unless the tenant interposes a payment defense (Johnson v. Qiu).
  • Under unique circumstances in a commercial landlord-tenant matter, tenant was not excused of complying with an emergency order requiring the deposit of rent into the court registry based on the court’s failure to first conduct an evidentiary hearing (2010 NW 107 Ave LLC v. Delta Bay Investments LLC).
  • Florida’s summary procedure statute controlled and set forth a different procedure for post-verdict and post-judgment motions, and tenant’s post-judgment motion was not authorized and timely under that statute (Fisher v. Housing Authority of Key West).
  • In a case involving aiding and abetting a fraudulent scheme to fund three loans against a lender, lender acted reasonably when it relied on an independent title insurance company’s issuance of a policy that omitted reference to a lis pendens that the lender knew about (Al Sabah v. World Business Lenders LLC).

Key Takeaways: In commercial eviction cases in Florida, a tenant’s failure to strictly comply with section 83.232 and pay rent into the court registry when required can yield swift and significant results. The landlord is generally entitled to the issuance of a writ of possession as a matter of right.

©2026 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.