Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Zorie
146 So. 3d 1209
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Nationstar filed a two-count foreclosure complaint (Nov. 4, 2008) alleging Zorie executed a February 19, 2007 promissory note and mortgage in favor of Fremont, assigned to Nationstar, and that she defaulted by June 2008. The original note was not attached to the complaint; a summary of its terms and the mortgage were attached.
- Nationstar later filed the original note and mortgage (with a blank endorsement) and an assignment; the note referenced an attached prepayment rider that was not included in early filings. Nationstar later served a complete copy including the rider in 2011.
- Zorie defaulted on answers and admitted missing payments; she filed motions to dismiss (denied) and ultimately a motion for judgment on the pleadings arguing the complaint was deficient because the note was incomplete (missing prepayment rider) and Nationstar had waived standing by withdrawing its reestablishment count.
- The trial court treated Zorie’s motion as one for summary judgment, granted judgment for Zorie without stated rationale, and denied Nationstar’s later motion to amend to add a reformation count.
- On appeal, the Fifth District held the complaint and its attachments (including the summary of the note) pleaded a viable foreclosure cause of action and that the missing prepayment rider was immaterial to the sufficiency of the complaint.
- Court reversed the final judgment for Zorie and remanded for further proceedings; because reversal was based on judgment on the pleadings error, the court declined to address the denial of leave to amend.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Zorie) | Defendant's Argument (Nationstar) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether complaint failed to state a foreclosure claim because the promissory note attached to the pleadings was incomplete (missing prepayment rider) | Note is incomplete on its face; incomplete note defeats pleading | The complaint, attachments, and summary of the note supplied material loan terms; missing rider was immaterial | Court held complaint sufficiently alleged foreclosure; rider immaterial; judgment on the pleadings was erroneous |
| Whether Nationstar waived standing by withdrawing its count to reestablish a lost note | Withdrawal of lost-note count constituted waiver of proof of standing | Nationstar had pled ownership and later filed the original note and assignment; standing was adequately pleaded | Court found Nationstar adequately pleaded ownership/standing; waiver argument rejected |
| Proper standard and scope for motion for judgment on the pleadings | Court should dismiss when pleadings (and attached exhibits) show plaintiff cannot prevail | Judgment on the pleadings must be decided on pleadings and attachments only; well-pleaded facts taken as true | Court applied standard and concluded pleadings supported Nationstar’s claim; trial court erred in granting judgment for defendant |
| Whether trial court’s denial of leave to amend should be reviewed on appeal | Zorie argued final judgment was proper so denial was moot | Nationstar sought to amend after judgment to add reformation; trial court denied | Appellate court reversed on other grounds and declined to decide the denial-of-amendment issue |
Key Cases Cited
- Thompson v. Napotnik, 923 So.2d 537 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (standard of review for judgment on the pleadings)
- Siegel v. Whitaker, 946 So.2d 1079 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (motion for judgment on the pleadings decided on pleadings and attachments; well-pleaded facts taken as true)
- Martinez v. Florida Power & Light Co., 863 So.2d 1204 (Fla. 2003) (pleading standards referenced for motions practice)
- Nicholas v. Ross, 721 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (exhibits attached to a complaint are part of the pleadings)
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Morcom, 125 So.3d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (party that holds the note/mortgage has standing to foreclose)
- Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. v. Lippi, 78 So.3d 81 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (standing in foreclosure actions)
- Carr v. Eslinger, 101 So.3d 423 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (discussion of amendment after judgment on the pleadings)
- Crown v. Chase Home Fin., 41 So.3d 978 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (public policy favors liberal leave to amend when merits would otherwise be precluded)