Yarbrough v. Decatur Housing Authority, Case No. 17-11500 (11th Cir. 2019) (en banc).
The Housing Act of 1937, 42 U.S.C. § 1437 et seq., does not create a privately enforceable right to a preponderance standard for housing termination lawsuits alleging a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Miller v. Homeland Property Owners Association, Inc., Case No. 4D18-1647 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019).
The Business Judgment Rule applies to decisions of property owners’ associations so long as the association had the contractual or statutory authority to perform the relevant acts, and if so, whether the board acted reasonably.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Stephenson, Case No. 5D18-733 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019).
The Fifth District agrees with Bank of N.Y. Mellon Tr. Co., Nat’l Ass’n v. Ginsberg, 221 So. 3d 1196, 1197 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017), and holds that a foreclosing lender is not required to identify the trust on whose behalf it is acting in order to properly allege standing.
Harrell v. The Ryland Group, Case No. 1D18-3728 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019).
An attic stepladder constitutes an “improvement to real property” and thus is covered by the ten-year statute of repose for construction improvements under Florida Statute section 95.11(3)(c).
Pirate’s Treasure, Inc. v. City fo Dunedin, Florida, Case No. 2D18-2774 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).
A landowner locked in a development dispute with a municipality may transfer the affected land to a third party and not lose standing to prosecute the dispute so long as it retains a sufficient interest in the property.
Project Development Enterprise, LLC v. Elka Holdings, LLC, CaseNo. 3D18-356 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).
The proceeds of a derivative action brought under Florida Statutes section 605.0802against a limited liability company are required by Florida Statutes section 605.0805(1) to be paid to the limited liability company and not the plaintiff.
Real State Golden Investments Inc. v. Larraín, Case No. 3D19-1369 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).
A trial court’s ruling on motions anticipated to be but not yet filed creates an objectively reasonable belief that the affected party will not receive a fair trial and is grounds for disqualification of the trial judge.
Roth v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (In re Roth), Case No: 17-11444 (11th Cir. 2019).
An “informational statement” sent to a borrower who has been discharged in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy does not violate the discharge injunction, 11 U.S.C. § 524.
Salcedo v. Hanna, Case No. 17-14077 (11th Cir. 2019).
Sending a single text message does not violate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of1991, 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii).
In Re: Standard Jury Instructions In Civil Cases and Standard Jury Instructions In Contract And Business Cases—Joint Report No. 19-01, Case No. SC19-185 (Fla. 2019).
The standard verdict form for breach of fiduciary duty is approved by the Florida Supreme Court.
Atkins North America, Inc. Tallahassee MH Parks, LLC, Case No. 1D17-2996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).
Reformation of a mortgage will not be permitted where doing so materially affects a creditor who recorded a judgment lien after the recordation of the inaccurate mortgage.
Suzuki Motor Corporation v. Winckler, Case No. 1D18-4815 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019).
The Apex Doctrine (“[an] agency head should not be subject to deposition, overobjection, unless and until the opposing parties have exhaustedother discovery and can demonstrate that the agency head isuniquely able to provide relevant information which cannot beobtained from other sources.”) does not apply outside of government and thus does not apply to shield the C.E.O. of multinational company from discovery.
Batterbee v. Roderick, Case No. 2D18-2037 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).
A permissive use of real property may change into a non-permissive use sufficient to support a claim for adverse possession.
Hopson v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, Case No. 2D18-673 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019).
A defending mortgagor that wins dismissal but does not admit privity with the plaintiff is not entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under Florida Statute section 57.105(7); Harris v. Bank of New York Mellon, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D141 (Fla. 2dDCA Dec. 28, 2018), is distinguished on its facts.
Beach Towing Services, Inc. v. Sunset Land Associates, LLC, Case Nos. 3D18-1837 & 3D18-2168 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019).
Restrictive covenants are interpreted in a fashion which least restricts the use of the property, and accordingly, the following provision prohibits a garage company but not a garage:
This property is being conveyed by the Grantor to the Granteesubject to the Grantee agreeing that the property will not be usedas a parking lot, storage yard facility or for a garage or tow truckcompany. This covenant shall run with the land.
Valencia Reserve Homeowners Association, Inc. Boynton Beach Associates, XIX, LLLP, Case No. 4D18-1320 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019).
It is not a violation of the Florida Homeowner’s Association Act for a developer to use working capital funds contributed by purchasers into a homeowner’s association account to fund the developer’s negative equity contributions under Florida Statute section 720.308(1)(b).
Grace and Naeem Uddin, Inc. v. Singer Architects, Inc., Case No. 4D18-2972 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019).
A supervising architect owes a duty to a contractor and may be held liable in tort for professional negligence notwithstanding the architect and contractor both have contracts with the developer, i.e., the existence of the contracts does not bar the tort duty owed by the architect to the builder.