1. The Second DCA just affirmed the entry of a judgment of foreclosure and reformation of a mortgage and deed despite the mortgagor’s claim that reformation was barred by the statute of limitations. Geweye v. Wilmington Sav. Fund Soc’y, No. 2D22-2816, 2023 WL 7383046 (Fla. 2d DCA Nov. 8, 2023). The Second DCA did not issue a written opinion in Geweye, so the case carries no precedential value; however, the affirmance provides hope for the survival of the Second DCA’s distinction, for purposes of the statute of limitations, between an action to enforce contract and an action to change the stated terms of the contract articulated in Corinthian Invs., Inc., v. Reeder, 555 So. 2d 871, 873 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989).
  2. In Geweye’s appeal of the judgment which foreclosed her mortgage and reformed the mortgage and deed, Geweye ostensibly relied on Hogg v. Villages of Bloomingdale I Homeowners Assoc (the subject of our April 2023 eBlast). Wilmington distinguished Hogg based on the fact it involved an HOA that sought to reform its declaration, not a deed. The errors in the declaration did not affect Hogg’s ownership interest in the property whereas in Geweye, if the deed transferring ownership contained the wrong legal description, Geweye did not technically own the property and therefore lacked standing to challenge the foreclosure or the reformation.
  3. Ostensibly, the Second DCA agreed with this argument and allowed the reformation in Geweye to stand, or at least found ample reason not to undo it. Notably, there were other issues raised in Wilmington’s answer brief which the appellate court may have relied upon in refusing to reverse the judgment, but they are outside the scope of this article. Although not a slam dunk, the per curiam affirmance is still noteworthy and provides hope for the survival of the Second DCA’s holding in Reeder. It is a welcome development on a frequently raised defense.

Click here to read the full article