Etter v. State Bank

Citations

• 76 Fla. 203
• 79 So. 724

Syllabus

<p>1. Tbe entry of deficiency judgments against the mortgagee or one liable for tbe debt in foreclosure proceedings is a power exercised by tbe Courts of Equity in tbis State under Rule No. 89 of Circuit Courts in Equity Actions.</p> <p>2. As between the parties to the suit the sum for which the ■ mortgaged premises were sold must, so long as the sale stands, be taken as the conclusive test of their value.</p> <p>3. Any defense that may be offered to a decree of foreclosure or against a personal decree for the debt should be presented in due course during the proceedings, or sufficient reason given for not doing so.</p> <p>4. Where the mortgagor is not in possession nor has ever been in possession of the land mortgaged to secure the purchase money he may set up the outstanding title as a defense to a_ bill to foreclose brought by the vendor for the unpaid purchase money.</p> <p>5. An objection by the mortgagor to the entry of a deficiency judgment against him in a foreclosure proceeding brought by the vendor of the land for the purchase money may rest upon the failure of consideration for the mortgaged debt when it appears that the facts constituting the defense were not known to the mortgagor in time to present the defense in the regular course of procedure, and that he used due diligence in presenting the same.</p>