Rashid v. Newberry Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
It is undisputed upon this record that the appellee bank, pursuant to its obligation under a mortgage contract, was required to provide a thirty-day notice of default to the appellant, Rashid.1 It is likewise undisputed that no thirty-day notice was given to anyone. In addition to the bank’s failure to comply with the thirty-day notice, the record shows that a number of other discovery issues have not been properly resolved. Summary judgment, therefore, is inappropriate. See Marlar v. Quincy State Bank, 463 So.2d 1233 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Foxfire Inn of Stuart, Florida, Inc. v. Neff, 433…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Marlar v. Quincy State BankDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
- Salzberg v. EisenbergDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1979
- Foxfire Inn of Stuart, Florida, Inc. v. NeffDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
3Cited by1 opinion
- Rashid v. Newberry Federal Savings & Loan Ass'nDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988