Posts tagged Paragraph 22.
The brief era of confusion amongst Florida trial judges regarding the standard for judging compliance with conditions precedent in residential mortgage foreclosures is hopefully coming to a close. Despite a rash of written opinions from Florida trial judges adopting a strict compliance standard for contractual conditions precedent, Florida's Fifth District Court of Appeal joined the Second and the Third District Court of Appeal in adopting a substantial compliance standard in Bank of New York Mellon, etc. v. Donna D. Johnson, 5D14-3626 (Fla. 5th DCA Jan. 29, 2016). The opinion ...
Tags:
Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Nunez,
Bank of New York Mellon v. Donna D. Johnson,
bring a court action,
burr forman,
Consumer Finance Litigation,
Consumer Finance Litigation & Arbitration,
Consumer Finance Litigation blog,
florida,
foreclosure,
mortgage,
Paragraph 22,
residential mortgage foreclosures,
substantial complianceMany judges in Miami-Dade County and elsewhere held the view that "strict" compliance was the standard to determine if a notice of default complied with the provisions of a paragraph 22 of a mortgage. To this day, no appellate court has ever adopted that standard in the mortgage foreclosure context. Instead, substantial compliance appeared to have strong support in cases examining contractual notice provisions. However, for many years, the absence of an opinion in the mortgage foreclosure context expressly adopting substantial compliance created an out for many judges in South ...
Tags:
Bank of New York Mellon v. Nunez,
burr forman,
Consumer Finance Litigation,
Consumer Finance Litigation & Arbitration,
Consumer Finance Litigation blog,
florida,
Green Tree Servicing v. Milam,
mortgage,
Paragraph 22,
Paragraph 22 Notices,
strict compliance,
Strict Compliance Standard,
Third DCAIn Gorel v. Bank of New York Mellon, 5D13-3272 (Fla. 5th DCA May 8, 2015) Florida's Fifth District Court of Appeal offered relief to increasingly popular arguments using minor defects in paragraph 22 notices of default as a defense to foreclosure. It has become popular among the foreclosure defense bar to point to minor variances between the language used in notices of default and the express language of paragraph 22, and assert that because the notices do not strictly conform word for word with paragraph 22, that foreclosure should be denied. These arguments have had some measure of ...
