HABERL v. 21ST MORTGAGE CORPORATION (2014)

Joann HABERL, Appellant, v. 21ST MORTGAGE CORPORATION, et al., Appellee.

No. 5D12–4839.

Decided: May 23, 2014

Carl J. Hognefelt and Barry M. Elkin, of Elkin & Hognefelt, Tampa, for Appellant. Thomas A. Valdez, of Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., Tampa, and Sonya Daws, of Quintairos, Prieto, Wood & Boyer, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Joann Haberl appeals a summary final judgment of foreclosure entered in favor of 21st Mortgage Corporation. Because the notice of default attached to the affidavit in support of 21st Mortgage's motion for summary judgment does not comply with the pre-acceleration notice requirements set forth in paragraph 22 of the mortgage,¹ we reverse the summary final judgment of foreclosure and remand for further proceedings. See Samaroo v. Wells Fargo Bank, 39 Fla. L. Weekly D670 (Fla. 5th DCA Mar. 28, 2014) (summary final judgment of foreclosure reversed where default letter that mortgagee sent to mortgagors failed to satisfy the pre-acceleration notice requirement of the mortgage as a condition precedent to foreclosure).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

FOOTNOTES

1. The notice of default failed to inform Haberl of the right to reinstate after acceleration and the right to assert in the foreclosure proceeding the non-existence of a default or other defense of borrower to acceleration and foreclosure.

PER CURIAM.

TORPY, C.J., EVANDER and BERGER, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network