Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Morcom
125 So. 3d 320
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Appellant seeks foreclosure; the lower court granted summary judgment for Appellees.
- The central issue is standing to foreclose under the Florida UCC and prior decisions.
- Florida UCC defines the person entitled to enforce an instrument as the holder, a nonholder in possession, or a person entitled under specific statutes.
- The original note attached was endorsed in blank, with Appellant’s name stamped in the endorsement field.
- Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. v. Lippi held that a blank-endorsed note gives standing to foreclose.
- The court reverses, holding that the holder of a blank-endorsed note has standing to foreclose and remands for proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to foreclose under Florida UCC | Appellant: holder endorsed in blank. | Appellees: requires ownership and possession. | Reversed; holder endorsed in blank has standing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. v. Lippi, 78 So.3d 81 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (holding holder has standing to foreclose when note is blank-endorsed)
- Harvey v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 69 So.3d 300 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (note holder standing framework within UCC context)
- Philogene v. ABN Amro Mortg. Grp. Inc., 948 So.2d 45 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (standing based on note possession and rights of holder)
- U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Knight, 90 So.3d 824 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (blank-endorsed note standing to foreclose cited by others)
- Riggs v. Aurora Loan Servs., LLC, 36 So.3d 932 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (presence of note rights to enforce under UCC cited)
- Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v. Azize, 965 So.2d 151 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (standing to foreclose under UCC framework)