Legal Opinion · Dissent

Taylor v. Finlayson

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided September 3, 1933Published

1DissentWhitfield, C. J.

(dissenting in part). — “In the absence of a statute, or rule of court made in compliance with law, no decree in chancery for a deficiency, after a sale of the mortgaged property could be entered in a court of equity, unless it be that the debt, without the mortgage, is such that a court of chancery would have jurisdiction of it, and could render a decree for it.” Webber v. Blanc, 39 Fla. 224, 22 So. 655.

“Denial of a deficiency decree in a mortgage foreclosure does not affect the obligation involved, but pertains only to the remedy for its enforcement.” Taylor v. Prine, 101 Fla. 967, 132 So.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Proctor v. HearneSupreme Court of Florida · 1930
  2. Webber v. BlancSupreme Court of Florida · 1897
  3. Taylor, Jr. v. PrineSupreme Court of Florida · 1931
  4. Drew v. HobbsSupreme Court of Florida · 1932
  5. Tischler v. Kurtz Bros.Supreme Court of Florida · 1895

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API