Skip to Content

Real Property, Financial Services, & Title Insurance Update: Week Ending May 24, 2019

Real Property Update

  • Attorneys' Fees / Voluntary Dismissal: it is an exception to the general rule that when a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses an action the defendant is the prevailing party, when both parties compromised in agreeing to a settlement to end their litigation - Valencia Golf & Country Club Homeowners' Ass'n, Inc. v. Cmty. Res. Servs., Inc., No. 2D17-4986 (Fla. 1st DCA May 22, 2019) (reversed)
  • Attorneys' Fees / Voluntary Dismissal / Foreclosure: borrower entitled to attorneys' fees as prevailing party, where bank voluntarily dismissed its case and there was never a judicial determination by trial court that bank was not a party to the contract (note and mortgage). Venezia v. JP Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp., No. 4D18-1278 (Fla. 4th DCA May 22, 2019) (reversed and remanded)

Financial Services Update

  • Rooker-Feldman Doctrine: pursuant to Rooker-Feldman doctrine preventing a federal court from reviewing state court decisions, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court's dismissal of a borrower's lawsuit against a lender and servicer seeking declaration that mortgage loan was rescinded because a prior foreclosure lawsuit in state court between the parties resulted in a final judgment - Zamore v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., No. 18-13635 (11th Cir. 2019)
  • TILA: borrower's notice of rescission pursuant to TILA was not proper and was nullified by borrowers continuing to make payments - Madura v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, L.P., No. 18-11716 (11th Cir. May 15, 2019)
  • Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act: merchant that prints more than five digits of a credit card number in violation of FACTA causes the person whose account number is disclosed to suffer a concrete injury sufficient to confer standing to that person to pursue claim - Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc., Nos. 16-16486, 16-16783 (11th Cir. 2019)

Title Insurance Update

  • Insurance law: New York insurance law prohibiting certain mortgage lenders from requiring borrowers to obtain title insurance from a specific title insurer, agent, or broker did not apply where transaction was between a seller and a purchaser of real property - Wenig Saltiel, LLP v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, 2016-3083 RIC (Sup. Ct. App. N.Y. May 10, 2019) (affirming dismissal)
©2024 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.