Legal Opinion

Neuschatz v. Rabin

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 14, 2000No. 4D99-3367PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We affirm the final judgment of foreclosure. Based on the contract found by the trial court there was legal consideration to support the note and mortgage. See Bayshore Royal Co. v. Doran Jason Co. of Tampa, Inc., 480 So.2d 651, 656 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). On the cross-appeal, we reverse that portion of the September 28, 1999 Amended Final Judgment of Foreclosure withholding issuance of the writ of possession until the third-party action is resolved. The purchaser at a foreclosure sale is entitled to possession of the premises from the time title vests in the purchaser. See Martorano v. Spicola,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bayshore Royal Co. v. Doran Jason Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  2. Martorano v. Spicola Ex Rel. SpicolaSupreme Court of Florida · 1933

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Upland Ventures, Inc. v. HSBC Bank USA, National Association, as Trustee for Ace Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2007-Sl2 Asset BackedDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API