71.011
Reestablishment of papers, records, and files.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
71.011 Reestablishment of papers, records, and files.—All papers, written or printed, of any kind whatsoever, and the records and files of any official, court or public office, may be reestablished in the manner hereinafter provided.
(1) WHO MAY REESTABLISH.—Any person interested in the paper, file or record to be reestablished may reestablish it.
(2) VENUE.—If reestablishment is sought of a record or file, venue is in the county where the record or file existed before its loss or destruction. If it is a private paper, venue is in the county where any person affected thereby lives or if such persons are nonresidents of the state, then in any county in which the person seeking the reestablishment desires.
(3) REMEDY CONCURRENT.—Nothing herein shall prevent the reestablishment of lost papers, records and files at common law or in equity in the usual manner.
(4) EFFECT.—
(a) Any paper, record or file reestablished has the effect of the original. A private paper has such effect immediately on recording the judgment reestablishing it, but a reestablished record does not have that effect until recorded and a reestablished paper or file of any official, court or public officer does not have that effect until a certified copy is filed with the official or in the court or public office where the original belonged. A certified copy of any reestablished paper, the original of which is required or authorized by law to be recorded, may be recorded.
(b) When any deed forming a link in a chain of title to land in this state has been placed on the proper record without having been acknowledged or proven for record and has thereafter been lost or destroyed, certified copies of the record of the deed as so recorded may be received as evidence to reestablish the deed if the deed has been so recorded for 20 years.
(5) COMPLAINT.—A person desiring to establish any paper, record or file, except when otherwise provided, shall file a complaint in chancery setting forth that the paper, record or file has been lost or destroyed and is not in the custody or control of the petitioner, the time and manner of loss or destruction, that a copy attached is a substantial copy of that lost or destroyed, that the persons named in the complaint are the only persons known to plaintiff who are interested for or against such reestablishment.
History.—s. 5, Nov. 21, 1829; s. 12, ch. 1369, 1862; s. 2, ch. 3019, 1877; RS 1523-1527, 1533; s. 1, ch. 5162, 1903; GS 1978-1982, 1997; RGS 3246-3250, 3265; CGL 5054-5058, 5073; s. 7, ch. 22858, 1945; s. 24, ch. 67-254.
Note.—Former ss. 71.01-71.06.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases, 1972–2019 · leading case: Brian and Cynthia Poag v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC
Brian and Cynthia Poag v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (2016)
“Instead, section 71.011, Florida Statutes (2014), entitled “Reestablishment of papers, records, and files,” contains the general standards for doing so.”
State Street Bank and Trust Co. v. Lord (2003)
“State Street sought to establish the promissory note and mortgage under section 71.011, Florida Statutes. State Street alleged that Hartley executed the note and mortgage and that, after multiple assignments, the documents were assigned to State Street by EMC Mortgage…”
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Badra (2008)
“We recognize that in Badra I, the trial court said it was re-establishing the note pursuant to section 71.011, Florida Statutes, rather than the statutory section relied on here by MERS.”
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC. v. Carter (2009)
“While it would be preferable to reestablish the written instrument in the manner authorized by section 71.011, Florida Statutes (2008), the failure to do so is not fatal to ESI’s attempt to enforce the agreement against Lejeune, provided that the trial court is satisfied as to…”
Lawyers Title Ins. Co., Inc. v. Novastar Mortg., Inc. (2003)
“As the owner of the note, whether it was lost or wrongfully retained by Netwide, Novastar could have sought to reestablish the note pursuant to Florida statutes. A party may enforce its rights by reestablishing the lost, stolen, or destroyed paper or instrument under the…”
Crescent Beach, Inc. v. Jarvis (1983)
“The second count alleges that the buyer executed and delivered to the sellers the purchase money note and mortgage as provided in the land sales contract but that those instruments have been lost and the sellers seek to reestablish those documents under section 71.011, Florida…”
Glynn v. First Union Nat. Bank (2005)
“In any event, the record reflects that First Union was in possession of the note at the time it was lost, and the trial court re-established the note pursuant to section 71.011, Florida Statutes. Further, although an assignment to First Union by its servicing agent, Fairbanks,…”
Connie L. Mielke and Blair C. Mielke v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, etc. (2019)
“3091 with the right to reestablish a lost document under section 71.011, Florida Statutes. Unlike section 673.”
Dunn v. Willis (1992)
“In addition to other matters of defense, the makers-payors claimed that, procedurally, the plaintiff, as owner-payee of the lost or destroyed note, was required to reestablish the note in a separate action under section 71.011, Florida Statutes, as a condition precedent to…”
Mason v. Rubin (1999)
“He argues that his proof complied with section 71.011, Florida Statutes (1995), which provides for establishing lost papers, records or files.”
O'Donovan v. Citibank (1998)
“Upon the commendable and appropriate confession of error of the appellee, summary judgment was improvidently entered on this count where the appellee was unable to supply a substantial copy of the lost promissory note to prove its essential terms as is generally required by…”
Cardet v. Rodriguez (1996)
“Appellants appeal an adverse summary judgment entered in favor of appellee on his action brought pursuant to section 71.011, Florida Statutes (1993) for the reestablishment of a purportedly "lost" promissory note.”
— 71.011(2) — 2 cases
Crescent Beach, Inc. v. Jarvis (1983)
“The second count alleges that the buyer executed and delivered to the sellers the purchase money note and mortgage as provided in the land sales contract but that those instruments have been lost and the sellers seek to reestablish those documents under section 71.011, Florida…”
Harvey v. Mattes (1986)
— 71.011(4) — 1 case
Carlsen & Co. v. Feldman (1996)
— 71.011(4)(a) — 1 case
Carlsen & Co. v. Feldman (1996)
— 71.011(5) — 4 cases
State Street Bank and Trust Co. v. Lord (2003)
“State Street sought to establish the promissory note and mortgage under section 71.011, Florida Statutes. State Street alleged that Hartley executed the note and mortgage and that, after multiple assignments, the documents were assigned to State Street by EMC Mortgage…”
O'Donovan v. Citibank (1998)
“Upon the commendable and appropriate confession of error of the appellee, summary judgment was improvidently entered on this count where the appellee was unable to supply a substantial copy of the lost promissory note to prove its essential terms as is generally required by…”
Connie L. Mielke and Blair C. Mielke v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, etc. (2019)
“3091 with the right to reestablish a lost document under section 71.011, Florida Statutes. Unlike section 673.”
State v. Hellmond (1996)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.