Legal Opinion
Cerrito v. Kovitch
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided December 29, 1982No. 81-1609PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HERSEY, Judge.
This appeal arises from an action to foreclose a mortgage. Appellants defended on the basis of a violation of the usury statute. § 687.03, Fla.Stat. (1977). Apparently in reliance on Smith v. Barnett Bank of Murray Hill, 350 So.2d 358 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), appellants raised usury as a counterclaim rather than pleading it as an affirmative defense. Appellants also unsuccessfully filed a demand for jury trial (on more than one occasion).
The various procedural skirmishes are rendered irrelevant by our determination that usury is an affirmative defense and that no right to trial by…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Tel Service Co. v. General Capital CorporationSupreme Court of Florida · 1969
- Hightower v. BigoneySupreme Court of Florida · 1963
- Coral Gables First Nat. Bank v. Constructors of Fla., Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960
- Diversified Enterprises, Inc. v. WestDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1962
- Spinney v. Winter Park Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Florida · 1935
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cerrito v. KovitchSupreme Court of Florida · 1984
- Matter of AkinsUnited States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · 1985
- BLUEWATER, INC. and ANTHONY S. WALKER v. CENTER STREET LENDING FUND IV SPE, LLCDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
- Bluewater, Inc. v. Ctr. St. Lending Fund IV Spe, LLCDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018