MR Hotels, LLC v. LLW Architects, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting the trial court erred by failing to follow controlling precedent, even when a party introduces a new argument challenging the precedent
• “[T]he assignment of the mortgage was superfluous. It was unnecessary because Florida law has always held that the mortgage follows the note.”
• “Under the law of negotiable instruments, therefore, the Bank had standing because it was the holder of a note originally indorsed in blank and then specially indorsed to the Bank.”
• “[O]wnership is not relevant to standing so much as the question of who is the ultimate beneficial owner of the proceeds of the foreclosure, an issue not normally or necessarily part of a foreclosure case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).