Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Credit Acceptance Corporation, Appellant, v. Terrence Hale, Appellee.
Credit Acceptance Corporation (“Credit Acceptance”) appeals a final judgment denying its motion for default final judgment. Credit Acceptance argues that the trial court erred in finding it had to prove disposition of the collateral asset was done in a commercially reasonable manner. We agree and, thus, reverse the ordered appealed.
Under section 679.610(2), Florida Statutes, disposition of collateral assets must be done in a commercially reasonable manner. However, “a secured party need not prove disposition of the collateral was done in a commercially reasonable manner unless the debtor places the secured party's compliance in issue.” Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Arwine, 276 So. 3d 275, 275 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019); see also S. Devs. & Earthmoving, Inc. v. Caterpillar Fin. Servs. Corp., 56 So. 3d 56, 60 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (holding deficiency balance appropriate where appellant did not prove disposition was commercially reasonable and debtor placed appellant's compliance in issue); Textron Fin. Corp. v. Lentine Marine Inc., 630 F. Supp. 2d 1352, 1358 (S.D. Fla. 2009) (noting the defendants placed in issue the commercial reasonableness of the sell, “which would shift the burden to Plaintiff to prove that its sales were in fact commercially reasonable”).
Here, Hale never placed the reasonableness of the sale in issue. In fact, Hale did not make any appearance below. “Therefore, the burden of proving the sale of the collateral asset was commercially reasonable never shifted to [Credit Acceptance].” Arwine, 276 So. 3d at 275. Because Credit Acceptance was not required to prove the commercial reasonableness of the sale, the trial court erred when it found in Hale's favor and denied Credit Acceptance's motion for default judgment. Accordingly, the final judgment is reversed and the matter remanded for the trial court to enter judgment for the full deficiency balance, as well as appropriate prejudgment interest and court costs.
Reversed and Remanded.
Per Curiam.
Bilbrey, M.K. Thomas, and Long, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 1D2024-1589
Decided: October 01, 2025
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)