Cameo Hotel & Apartments, Ltd. v. Morris
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
In considering objections to a- foreclosure sale the “ ‘chancellor has a large discretion which will only be interfered with by the appellate court in a clear case of injustice.’ ” Crichlow v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y, 131 Fla. 752, 756, 180 So. 382, 384 (1938); accord Maule Indus. v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 91 So.2d 307, 311 (Fla.1956). Although appellants complain of the procedures followed at the foreclosure sale, such confusion as may have existed was the proximate result of a chain of events set in motion by appellants themselves. They will not now be heard to complain. See…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Maule Industries v. Seminole Rock and Sand CompanySupreme Court of Florida · 1956
- Crichlow v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesSupreme Court of Florida · 1938
- Malkus v. GainesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
3Cited by2 opinions
- Williams v. Amax Chemical Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
- EBS Partners LLC v. BlackburnDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005