Florida Real Property and Business Litigation Report
Volume XVII, Issue 47
November 23, 2024
Manuel Farach
U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v. Rodriguez, Case No. 2D2023-1694 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024).
https://2dca.flcourts.gov/content/download/2443744/opinion/Opinion_2023-1694.pdf
A party seeking to reestablish a lost promissory note under Florida Statutes section 673.3091(1) need only establish the three factors under the statute and does not need to prove “how the note was lost, nor the circumstances surrounding its loss.”
Jones v. Bank Of America, N.A., Case No. 4D2023-2648 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024).
https://4dca.flcourts.gov/content/download/2443660/opinion/Opinion_2023-2648.pdf
The Florida Supreme Court’s 2023 amendments to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530(a) have superseded the requirements of a trial court to set forth factual findings of the Rowe factors as set forth in Guardianship of Halpert v. Rosenbloom, 698 So. 2d 938, 939 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (“the lack of a transcript did not preclude appellate review because the order was fundamentally erroneous on its face for failing to make express findings concerning the Rowe factors”) and Delmonico v. Crespo, 127 So. 3d 576, 578–79 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) ( “[a]n order awarding attorney’s fees is fundamentally erroneous on its face when the trial court fails to make specific findings”).