Figueroa v. Federal National Mortgage Ass'n
180 So. 3d 1110
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- SunTrust filed foreclosure in 2010 alleging Appellant defaulted on payments due March 1, 2009; Fannie Mae later substituted as plaintiff.
- Case went to a bench trial in October 2014; Fannie Mae presented one witness, Jeff Anderson, a Seterus employee (loan servicer).
- No documents (note, assignments, payment history, default letter, proposed final judgment) were admitted into evidence at trial.
- Anderson testified he reviewed Fannie Mae records and a proposed final judgment but lacked personal knowledge about SunTrust’s possession/loss of the note, mailing/receipt of the default notice, and many provenance issues.
- Trial court found Fannie Mae had established a prima facie case and entered an in rem final judgment of foreclosure for $257,906.72; appellant moved for involuntary dismissal.
- The appellate court reversed, holding the record lacked competent, substantial evidence on reestablishment of the lost note, standing, amount due, and compliance with mortgage paragraph 22.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reestablishment of lost note | Fannie Mae relied on business records and a lost-note affidavit in its court file and Anderson’s testimony to reestablish the lost note | Appellant argued Fannie Mae failed to introduce the lost-note affidavit or the note into evidence and Anderson lacked personal knowledge | Court: Reestablishment failed — affidavit and note were not admitted; Anderson lacked requisite knowledge; statutory requirements not proven |
| Standing to foreclose | Fannie Mae asserted it had authority/ownership to enforce the note (papers in court file) | Appellant: no original note or admissible assignments/endorsements proving SunTrust had standing at suit’s inception | Court: No standing proven — original note not tendered and reestablishment inadequate; endorsements/assignments not admitted or dated to show standing at filing |
| Proof of amount owed | Fannie Mae relied on Anderson’s review of records and the proposed final judgment showing the debt | Appellant: without business records or payment history in evidence, amount and fees not proven | Court: Amount not proven — no loan history or underlying records admitted; no evidence supporting interest, fees, taxes, or costs |
| Compliance with paragraph 22 (default notice) | Fannie Mae maintained business records showed compliance and Anderson confirmed review | Appellant: no default letter admitted; Anderson could not confirm mailing method or receipt | Court: Compliance not proven — no notice document admitted and witness lacked knowledge of mailing/receipt |
Key Cases Cited
- Wolkoff v. Am. Home Mortg. Servicing, Inc., 153 So.3d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (insufficient proof of debt and failure to admit business records required reversal)
- Correa v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 118 So.3d 962 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (documents identified but not admitted are incompetent to support a judgment)
- Gee v. U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 72 So.3d 211 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (plaintiff must tender original note or properly reestablish a lost note under statute)
- Lacombe v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 149 So.3d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (absence of evidence of plaintiff’s standing requires reversal)
- Green v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 109 So.3d 1285 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (undated indorsement in blank insufficient to prove enforcement right at suit’s filing)
- McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 79 So.3d 170 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (party seeking foreclosure must demonstrate standing to foreclose)