Real Property, Financial Services, & Title Insurance Update: Week Ending June 10, 2022

Real Property Litigation   |   Consumer Finance   |   Title Insurance   |   June 10, 2022
Download Download   
Share Share Page

Real Property Update

  • Deed / Automatic Reverter: Deed to municipality was a fee simple conveyance with an automatic reverter clause, and section 95.36’s limitations period was inapplicable to that deed; instead, section 689.18, which also contains time limitations but which expressly exempts from those limitations conveyances to a governmental entity, applied – 1000 Brickell, Ltd. v. City of Miami, No. 3D20-1046 (Fla. 3d DCA June 8, 2022) (denying motion for rehearing, but withdrawing prior opinion, and reversing and remanding)
  • Foreclosure / Motion to Set Aside: No legal basis existed to set aside foreclosure sale because defendant had been properly served through its registered agent and defaulted when it failed to defend; however, defendant was entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard regarding lender’s claims for unliquidated damages, including attorneys’ fees, and was entitled to evidentiary hearing on whether such notice that was sent was proper – Crimson 27, LLC v. Taylor Made Lending, LLC, No. 3D21-2360 (Fla. 3d DCA June 8, 2022) (affirming in part and reversing in part)
  • Foreclosure / Business Records Exception: Court correctly admitted the payment history under business records exception to hearsay rule; however, circuit court mistakenly calculated accrued interest, flood insurance included in judgment exceeded the amount supported by the payment history, and legal expenses included in judgment was not supported by the evidence – Cayard v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, No. 4D21-1326 (Fla. 4th DCA June 8, 2022) (affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded)

Financial Services Update

  • FCRA / Notice to CRA / Sufficiency of Pleading: Plaintiff failed to assert that he notified the CRA of any alleged inaccurate debt or report by a creditor, which would have subsequently triggered the need for an investigation; providing notice to the furnisher, as plaintiff alleged was done, would not suffice – Ngambo v. Bank of Am., N.A., No. 7:20-cv-02221 (S.D.N.Y. June 8, 2022) (granting motion to dismiss)
  • FDCPA / Standing: Plaintiff failed to demonstrate standing to pursue her claims; plaintiff’s allegations of emotional distress were insufficient to establish standing, as were plaintiff’s other arguments – Nojovits v. Ceteris Portfolio Servs., LLC, No. 1:22-cv-02833 (E.D.N.Y. June 7, 2022) (dismissing case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction)

Title Insurance Update

No cases of interest to report.

©2023 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.

Subscribe to Publications


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.