U.S. Bank Nat. Ass'n v. Quadomain Condominum Ass'n
103 So. 3d 977
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- U.S. Bank held a first mortgage on a condominium unit and obtained final summary judgment and a certificate of title after the owner defaulted.
- Before judgment and title, the owner died and the unit passed to the owner's heirs, prompting U.S. Bank to file a Supplemental Complaint to Re-foreclose Mortgage to Foreclose Omitted Defendant and record a supplemental lis pendens.
- During the interim, Association fees went unpaid and, after U.S. Bank recorded its lis pendens, the Association recorded a lien against U.S. Bank and filed a foreclosure suit on that lien.
- U.S. Bank did not respond to the lien-foreclosure complaint; default final summary judgment was entered and the unit was sold at a public sale.
- U.S. Bank moved to vacate under Rule 1.540, arguing the lien action was barred by the supplemental lis pendens; trial court denied the motion.
- The court held that under Florida law, the lienforeclosure action lacked jurisdiction because a lis pendens divests jurisdiction except for timely intervention in the lawsuit creating the lis pendens; the Association should have intervened in the re-foreclosure action to recover its unpaid fees.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does a supplemental lis pendens divest the lien-foreclosure court of jurisdiction? | U.S. Bank contends lis pendens divested jurisdiction. | Association argues lis pendens does not bar its lien action. | No jurisdiction to foreclose; reversed. |
| Must a party intervene in the lis pendens proceeding to enforce an unrecorded interest? | Bank argues no requirement to intervene in lien action. | Association contends intervention is required to enforce unrecorded interests. | Intervention required; lien action barred without it. |
| What is the effect of section 48.23(l)(d), Fla. Stat. (2010) on unrecorded interests? | Bank asserts no effect on liens if lis pendens exists. | Association asserts the statute requires intervention to preserve unrecorded interests. | Statutory intervention required; association must intervene. |
Key Cases Cited
- Fischer v. Fischer, 873 So.2d 534 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (lis pendens protects future purchasers and from intervening liens)
- Chiusolo v. Kennedy, 614 So.2d 491 (Fla.1993) (purpose and effect of lis pendens notice)
- Seligman v. N. Am. Mtg. Co., 781 So.2d 1159 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (notice binds purchasers and liens until final judgment)
- Greenwald v. Graham, 130 So.608 (Fla.1930) (purchasers are bound by judgments against the party from whom they purchased)
- Giffen Indus. of Jacksonville, Inc. v. Se. Assocs., Inc., 357 So.2d 217 (Fla.1st DCA 1978) (attempt to enforce lien after lis pendens barred by section 48.23)
- Baron v. Aiello, 319 So.2d 198 (Fla.3d DCA 1975) (judgment lien foreclosure filed after lis pendens barred)