Padgett Law Group
Menu

PLG NEWS

News + updates + recent press

Categories

All
Arkansas
Bankruptcy
Case Law
Closings
Compliance
Evictions
FDCPA
FHA
Florida
Foreclosure
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Kentucky
Legislative
Michigan
Moratoriums
Ohio
PANDIFFERENT
Pennsylvania
Personnel
Real Estate
Regulatory
REO
Tennessee
Texas
Title
Trending Cases

Archives

January 2023
November 2022
September 2022
August 2022
June 2022
April 2022
March 2022
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
August 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
February 2019
January 2019
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
March 2018
January 2018
December 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017

Florida’s Fourth DCA Confirms the One-Year Statute of Limitations for a Deficiency Action Brought Within a Foreclosure Case

1/6/2021

 
On December 9, 2020, in Accardi v. Regions Bank, No. 4D20-0662, the Fourth DCA held that the one-year statute of limitations specified in section 95.11(5)(h), Fla. Stat., applies to a motion for deficiency judgment brought within an existing mortgage foreclosure action. The Court also determined the limitation period began with the issuance of the Certificate of Title. 
Prior to reviewing the Court’s ruling, the timeline of events within the case are crucial to the statute of limitations analysis. 
  1. August 2015: a Final Judgment of Foreclosure, which retained jurisdiction to seek a deficiency, was entered by the circuit court. 
  2. December 3, 2015: the Certificate of Sale was issued in which the bank was the purchaser. 
  3. April 2016, the clerk of court issued a certificate of title naming the bank as the title holder.
  4. September 2018: the circuit court granted the bank’s motion to tax attorney’s fees.
  5. March 12, 2019: the bank moved for the entry of a deficiency judgment within the foreclosure action, which included both the sale deficiency and the attorney’s fees.
  6. February 2020: the trial court held a final hearing on the motion for deficiency judgment. The court ruled that section 95.11(5)(h) statute of limitations did not bar the bank’s claim. Final Judgment of Deficiency was entered in favor of the bank in the amount of $558,318.93.
​
This case involves the application of the statute of limitations contained in section 95.11(5)(h), which provides a one-year statute of limitations in an action to enforce a claim of a deficiency related to a note secured by a mortgage against a residential property. The statute establishes that the limitations period shall commence on the day after the certificate is issued by the clerk of court or the day after the mortgagee accepts a deed in lieu of foreclosure. 

The Court determined that because subsection (5)(h) applies to “an action to enforce a claim of a deficiency,” it is essential to focus on how Chapter 95 defines an “action.” Section 95.011, provides, in pertinent part: “a civil action or proceeding, called ‘action’ in this chapter… shall be barred unless begun within the time prescribed in this chapter or, if a different time is prescribed elsewhere in these statutes, within the time prescribed elsewhere.”

The Fourth DCA held that a motion for deficiency, even within an existing mortgage foreclosure lawsuit, amounts to a “civil action or proceeding” within the meaning of statute. Accordingly, the statute of limitations to bring a deficiency action relating to a residential foreclosure is one-year from the issuance of the Certificate of Title. 

Comments are closed.
    PLG BLOG DISCLAIMER
    ​The information contained on this blog shall not constitute legal advice or a legal opinion. The existence of or review and/or use of this blog or any information hereon does not and is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Further, no information on this blog should be construed as investment advice. Independent legal and financial advice should be sought before using any information obtained from this blog. It is important to note that the cases are subject to change with future court decisions or other changes in the law. For the most up-to-date information, please contact Padgett Law Group (“PLG”). PLG shall have no liability whatsoever to any user of this blog or any information contained hereon, for any claim(s) related in any way to the use of this blog.  Users hereby release and hold harmless PLG of and from any and all liability for any claim(s), whether based in contract or in tort, including, but not limited to, claims for lost profits or consequential, exemplary, incidental, indirect, special, or punitive damages arising from or related to their use of the information contained on this blog or their inability to use this blog. This Blog is provided on an "as is" basis without warranties of any kind, either express or implied, including, but not limited to, warranties of title or implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. 
HOME
ABOUT
PRACTICE AREAS
CAREERS
CONTACT US
Picture
Picture

Padgett Law Group and Padgett Law Group EP are D/B/As of Timothy D. Padgett, P.A. Timothy D. Padgett, P.A.'s practice areas include creditors' rights, estate planning and probate, real estate transactions and litigation. Not all practices or services are available in all states in which Timothy D. Padgett, P.A. practices.
PRIVACY STATEMENT | WEBSITE DESIGN BY SQFT.MANAGEMENT
  • HOME
  • ABOUT PADGETT
    • THE DIFFERENCE
    • AFFILIATIONS
  • STATES OF SERVICE
    • FLORIDA
    • GEORGIA
    • TENNESSEE
    • ARKANSAS
    • TEXAS
    • OHIO
    • INDIANA
    • PENNSYLVANIA
    • MISSISSIPPI
    • ALABAMA
  • PRACTICE AREAS
    • NATIONAL
    • FORECLOSURE
    • BANKRUPTCY
    • REGULATORY AFFAIRS
    • LITIGATION
    • REO, TITLE, & EVICTIONS
    • CLOSINGS
    • LOSS MITIGATION
  • PLG NEWS
  • CAREERS
  • CLOSINGS
  • CONTACT US
  • HOME
  • ABOUT PADGETT
    • THE DIFFERENCE
    • AFFILIATIONS
  • STATES OF SERVICE
    • FLORIDA
    • GEORGIA
    • TENNESSEE
    • ARKANSAS
    • TEXAS
    • OHIO
    • INDIANA
    • PENNSYLVANIA
    • MISSISSIPPI
    • ALABAMA
  • PRACTICE AREAS
    • NATIONAL
    • FORECLOSURE
    • BANKRUPTCY
    • REGULATORY AFFAIRS
    • LITIGATION
    • REO, TITLE, & EVICTIONS
    • CLOSINGS
    • LOSS MITIGATION
  • PLG NEWS
  • CAREERS
  • CLOSINGS
  • CONTACT US