From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schroth v. Cape Coral Bank

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Nov 28, 1979
377 So. 2d 50 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

Summary

holding a property owner who did not appear in a mortgage foreclosure action until after the sale could still assert a claim to any surplus

Summary of this case from Rushmore Loan Mgmt. Servs. v. Solorio

Opinion

No. 79-190.

November 28, 1979.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Lee County, R. Wallace Pack, J.

Frank J. Aloia of Aloia, Dudley Roosa, Cape Coral, for appellants.


Appellants, Paul Schroth and Josephine Schroth, were defendants in a suit brought by The Cape Coral Bank to foreclose a mortgage on property owned by them. They made no appearance in the suit, and a final judgment was entered in favor of the Bank in which the trial court retained jurisdiction to enter additional orders as necessary. The foreclosure sale resulted in proceeds exceeding the Bank's entitlement.

Subsequently, the Schroths filed a motion seeking to establish a priority interest in the surplus proceeds on the basis that they held a security interest in the property superior to the interests of all claimants other than the Bank. The trial court entered an order finding that while the Schroths did have priority over another defendant who had filed an answer in the foreclosure suit that, nevertheless, they had waived their priority by failing to answer. We think the court erred in this ruling.

No party in the foreclosure suit sought any determination of its rights in the surplus proceeds. One party, Gilvesy Construction, Inc., however, did pray that any excess proceeds be paid into the registry of the court for distribution to those whose claims might be established as inferior to those of the Bank. The trial court, therefore, should have determined the interests of the Schroths and the other defendants in the foreclosure suit at an evidentiary hearing.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine the rights to the excess proceeds of all claimants who were defendants in the foreclosure suit, irrespective of whether they filed responsive pleadings. This hearing should follow appropriate notice to the defendants in the foreclosure suit.

OTT and RYDER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Schroth v. Cape Coral Bank

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Nov 28, 1979
377 So. 2d 50 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

holding a property owner who did not appear in a mortgage foreclosure action until after the sale could still assert a claim to any surplus

Summary of this case from Rushmore Loan Mgmt. Servs. v. Solorio

holding that the trial court should have determined the interests of the property owners and the other defendants in a foreclosure suit by an evidentiary hearing, irrespective of whether they filed responsive pleadings

Summary of this case from JP Morgan Chase Bank v. U.S. Bank National Ass'n

In Schroth v. Cape Coral Bank, 377 So.2d 50, 51 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), the court held that a property owner who did not appear in a mortgage foreclosure action until after the sale could still assert a claim to any surplus. The court remanded with directions to the trial court to hold a hearing "to determine the rights to the excess proceeds of all claimants who were defendants in the foreclosure suit, irrespective of whether they filed responsive pleadings."

Summary of this case from Household Finance v. Bank of America

In Schroth, the property owner/mortgagors failed to answer the bank/mortgagee's complaint and never made an appearance until after foreclosure.

Summary of this case from Hamilton v. Hughes
Case details for

Schroth v. Cape Coral Bank

Case Details

Full title:PAUL SCHROTH AND JOSEPHINE SCHROTH, HUSBAND AND WIFE, APPELLANTS, v. THE…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Nov 28, 1979

Citations

377 So. 2d 50 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

Citing Cases

United States ex rel. Farmer's Home Administration, United States Department of Agriculture v. Sneed

The circuit court erred by focusing upon the United States' failure to file a crossclaim or a counterclaim.…

Scott v. Haufler

The cause is REVERSED and REMANDED for an evidentiary hearing to establish the entitlement of Florida Rock…