Fighting for a Secure Future With Strong Legal Representation SCHEDULE A FREE 30-MINUTE CONSULTATION

Francesca Sickler v. AS Lily, LLC

Practice Area: Foreclosure

Date: October 30, 2015

Outcome: Final Judgment for Plaintiff Upheld!

At trial, it became apparent that as a result of this loan being transferred multiple times prior to suit being filed the loan payment history was less than reliable. I made the executive decision not to introduce it into evidence. The borrower had passed away and there was no viable estate from which the Plaintiff could collect the debt. The exhibits I entered into evidence were the 5-year Interest Only Adjustable Rate Note, the Mortgage, the Assignments, the default letter, the escrow summary of the present Plaintiff demonstrating the amounts paid for taxes and insurance. No evidence was submitted by the defense that any payments had been made against the principal amount of the loan. Judgment was entered in the amount of $400,000, the principal amount of the interest-only loan, plus escrow amounts.

At the trial and on Defendant's Motion for Rehearing, the Court explained that standing existed because of the facts introduced into evidence that demonstrated the Plaintiff had to retrieve the Original Note from an earlier foreclosure before filing suit in this case, and that since the default occurred in the first five (5) years of the obligation, that amount due was the principal amount of the loan.

After trial, the non-borrower spouse appealed the issues of (1) Standing; and (2) Whether there was competent substantial evidence to support the Final Judgment. At Oral Argument, counsel for the Defendant admitted the Plaintiff had standing. The Justices focused on the fact that the Note was sufficient evidence as to the amount due and owing where the breach occurred during the first year of the loan. I was successfully able to distinguish Wolkoff, a Second District case where no evidence was admitted as opposed to our case where there was sufficient evidence. After Oral Argument before the Second District Court of Appeal, the Second DCA quickly affirmed the trial court's Final Judgment with a Per Curiam opinion.

{ "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "FAQPage", "mainEntity": [ { "@type": "Question", "name": "What is an unlawful detainer in Florida?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "An unlawful detainer is a court action to remove someone from your property who has no lease or legal right to stay, such as a former partner, family member, or guest." } }, { "@type": "Question", "name": "How is unlawful detainer different from eviction or ejectment?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Unlawful detainer applies when someone had permission but no lease; eviction applies to tenants; ejectment involves disputes over ownership or title." } }, { "@type": "Question", "name": "How long does an unlawful detainer case take in Florida?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "In most Florida counties, an uncontested unlawful detainer can conclude within a few weeks. Contested cases may take longer based on court schedules." } }, { "@type": "Question", "name": "Can I change the locks or turn off utilities?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "No. Self-help actions are illegal in Florida. Always wait for a court order and the sheriff’s writ of possession before retaking the property." } }, { "@type": "Question", "name": "Do I need an attorney for an unlawful detainer case?", "acceptedAnswer": { "@type": "Answer", "text": "Yes. An experienced attorney can ensure your filing meets Florida law, avoid costly mistakes, and expedite the process to regain possession." } } ] }