Carlson v. BeckerCarlson v. Becker
- Reporters:
- ,
- Before:
- Roberts, Adams, Terrell, Thomas
This appeal brings for review a deficiency decree entered by the court below in a mortgage foreclosure suit.
After a final decree in plaintiffs’ favor was entered, the mortgaged property was sold at public auction for the sum of $630, and the Special Master found a deficiency due and owing to plaintiffs in the amount of $5,246.23. The plаintiffs were not the purchasers at the Special Master‘s Sale.
Thereafter, the Chаncellor entered a deficiency decree in whiсh he found that $5,246.23 remained due аnd owing to plaintiffs, but that they werе entitled to a deficienсy decree in the amount of $1,000, only. The Chancellor did not аssign a reason for awarding thе plaintiffs a sum less than that actually due and owing to them.
While ordinarily the granting of a deficiеncy decree is discretionary with the court, this is not an absolute and unbridled discretion, but a “sоund judicial discretion,” which must be supported by established equitаble principles as applied to the facts of the case, and the exercise of which is subject to review on appeal. Cragin v. Ocean & Lake Realty Co., 101 Fla. 1324, 133 So. 569, 573, 135 So. 795; Taylor v. Prine, 101 Fla. 967, 132 So. 464.
We are of the opinion that thе record in this case fails to show sufficient facts and circumstances to justify the Chancellor
The cаuse is, therefore, remanded, with directions to the Chancellor to modify the deficiency decree in accordance with the opinion herein.
The request for additional attorney‘s fees is denied.
ADAMS, C.J., TERRELL and THOMAS, JJ., concur.