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.

Skip to Content

Real Property, Financial Services, & Title Insurance Update: Week Ending January 24, 2020

Real Property Update

  • Quiet Title / Motion to Dismiss: Trial court not permitted to consider or take judicial notice of amended lis pendens and partial release of mortgage that were outside the counterclaim to which a motion to dismiss was directed – Migliazzo v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 2D18-655 (Fla. 2d DCA Jan. 24, 2020) (reversing dismissal of counterclaim of quiet title)
  • Foreclosure / Sua Sponte Dismissal: Dismissal was procedurally improper and Yelen v. Bankers Trust Co., 476 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), was not controlling where language in due-on-sale clause differed from that in Yelen; due-on-sale clause did not contain language requiring voluntary transfer “by borrower,” but rather encompassed any and all transfers of the subject property – Bank of N.Y. Mellon Corp. v. Hernandez, No. 3D19-328 (Fla. 3d DCA Jan. 22, 2020) (reversed and remanded)
  • Property Appraisal / Settlement Agreement: Trial court erred in determining landowner was entitled to a reduction in property appraisal market value where conveyance and release agreement was only available to those who owned a qualifying residence before the effective date; landowner only had a concrete foundation on his property, which was not a “residence” – Broward Cty. v. Font, No. 4D19-150 (Fla. 4th DCA Jan. 22, 2020) (reversed and remanded)

Financial Services

  • FDCPA / Pleading Sufficiency: Plaintiff’s second amended complaint failed to state an FDCPA claim when it failed to establish that either defendant is a debt collector beyond the assertion of vague and boilerplate allegations, and it asserted in only a vague and conclusory manner that defendants’ conduct qualified as abusive and oppressive conduct without describing such conduct engaged by either defendant – Ponthieux v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, No. 2:18-cv-00608 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2020) (recommending dismissal motion be granted in part)
  • FCRA / Pleading Sufficiency: While complaint sufficiently stated claim for defendant’s negligent violation of the FCRA, it failed to state a claim for defendant’s willful violation of the FCRA because it did not sufficiently plead that defendant knowingly or recklessly failed to follow reasonable procedures – Mader v. Experian Info. Sols., LLC, No. 1:19-cv-03787 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 17, 2020) (granting in part and denying in part defendant’s dismissal motion)
  • ECOA: Plaintiff did not identify any specific policy or practice by defendants, nor any adverse impact on African Americans, to support a disparate treatment claim under the ECOA – Guy v. Auto. Ins. Co. of Hartford Conn., No. 1:18-cv-02620 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 22, 2020) (granting defendants’ motions to dismiss)

Title Insurance

  • No cases of interest to report.
Related Practices
Consumer Finance
©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.