Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 95.281 (2025)

Limitations; instruments encumbering real property.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

95.281 Limitations; instruments encumbering real property.—

(1) The lien of a mortgage or other instrument encumbering real property, herein called mortgage, except those specified in subsection (5), shall terminate after the expiration of the following periods of time:

(a) If the final maturity of an obligation secured by a mortgage is ascertainable from the record of it, 5 years after the date of maturity.

(b) If the final maturity of an obligation secured by a mortgage is not ascertainable from the record of it, 20 years after the date of the mortgage, unless prior to such time the holder of the mortgage:

1. Rerecords the mortgage and includes a copy of the obligation secured by the mortgage so that the final maturity is ascertainable; or

2. Records a copy of the obligation secured by the mortgage from which copy the final maturity is ascertainable and by affidavit identifies the mortgage by its official recording data and certifies that the obligation is the obligation described in the mortgage;

in which case the lien shall terminate 5 years after the date of maturity.

(c) For all obligations, including taxes, paid by the mortgagee, 5 years from the date of payment. A mortgagee shall have no right of subrogation to the lien of the state for taxes paid by the mortgagee to protect the security of his or her mortgage unless he or she obtains an assignment from the state of the tax certificate. Redemption of the tax certificate shall be insufficient for subrogation.

(2) If an extension agreement executed by the mortgagee or the mortgagee’s successors in interest and the mortgagor or the mortgagor’s successors in interest is recorded, the time shall be extended as follows:

(a) If the final maturity of the obligation, as extended, secured by the mortgage is ascertainable from the record of the extension agreement, 5 years after the date of final maturity of the obligation as extended.

(b) If the final maturity of the obligation, as extended, secured by the mortgage is not ascertainable from the record of the extension agreement, 20 years after the date of the extension agreement, unless prior to such time the holder of the mortgage:

1. Rerecords the mortgage and includes a copy of the obligation, as extended, secured by the mortgage so that the final maturity is ascertainable; or

2. Records a copy of the obligation, as extended, secured by the mortgage from which copy the final maturity is ascertainable and by affidavit identifies the mortgage by its official recording data and certifies that the obligation is the obligation described in the mortgage;

in which case the lien shall terminate 5 years after the date of maturity as extended.

(3) If the record of the mortgage shows that it secures an obligation payable in installments and the maturity date of the final installment of the obligation is ascertainable from the record of the mortgage, the time shall run from the maturity date of the final installment.

(4) The time shall be extended only as provided in this law and shall not be extended by any other agreement, nonresidence, disability, part payment, operation of law, or any other method.

(5) This section does not apply to mortgages or deeds of trust executed by any railroad or other public utility corporation or by any receiver or trustee of them or to liens or notices of liens under chapter 713.

History.—ss. 1-7, ch. 22560, 1945; s. 1, ch. 29977, 1955; s. 18, ch. 74-382; s. 1, ch. 77-174; s. 4, ch. 83-267; s. 3, ch. 83-311; s. 527, ch. 95-147.

Note.—Former ss. 95.28-95.32.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 52 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1977–2024 · leading case: Houck Corp. v. New River, Ltd., Pasco, 900 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Houck Corp. v. New River, Ltd., Pasco, 900 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). · cites it 27× “There, the court held that "[t]he timeliness of an action to foreclose a mortgage is controlled by section 95.”

Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas, Etc. v. Beauvais, 188 So. 3d 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). · cites it 12× “(iii) The majority opinion conflates the statute of repose with the statute of limitations The practical effect of the majority’s opinion is to conflate the statute of repose for foreclosure actions (section 95.281 of the Florida Statutes) with the statute of limitations for…”

Am. Bankers Life Assur. v. 2275 West, 905 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). · cites it 10× “2275 West also moved for summary judgment claiming that foreclosure was barred by section 95.281 of the Florida Statutes. On February 13, 2003, American Bankers' motion for summary judgment was granted.”

Zlinkoff v. Von Aldenbruck, 765 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). · cites it 25× “§ 95.281, Fla. Stat. (1999). Here, the recorded mortgage reflected a final maturity date of February 1992.”

WRH Mortg., Inc. v. Butler, 684 So. 2d 325 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). · cites it 10× “§ 1821 (1995) preempts section 95.281 and grants WRH, an assignee of the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC), six years within which to institute suit in a foreclosure matter.”

CCM Pathfinder Palm Harbor Mgmt., LLC v. Unknown Heirs, 198 So. 3d 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). · cites it 6× “In response, six of those unit owners filed motions to dismiss, asserting that Pathfinder’s foreclosure action was barred by the five-year statute of limitations set forth in section 95.”

Lnb-017-13, LLC v. Hsbc Bank USA, 96 F. Supp. 3d 1358 (S.D. Fla. 2015). · cites it 9× “In Beauvais , the Third District Court of Appeal of Florida held that the hen of mortgage does not become null and void until after the expiration of the 5-year statute of limitation because Fla. Stat. § 95.281 (l)(a) 1 operates as a statute of repose and terminates the mortgage…”

Layton v. Bay Lake Ltd. P'ship, 818 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). · cites it 6× “When Layton filed her foreclosure action February 4, 1999, nearly ten years after the note was executed, the trial court determined that the five-year statute of limitations contained in section 95.281, Florida Statutes (1989), applied to bar Layton’s action.”

Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., 143 So. 3d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). · cites it 2× “Citibank filed a motion to dismiss the quiet title action arguing inter alia that section 95.281(1), Florida Statutes (2012), provides in part that: (1) The lien of a mortgage or other instrument encumbering real property, herein called mortgage, .”

Pitts v. Pastore, 561 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). · cites it 3× “Pitts contends that the statute of limitations, under section 95.281(1), Florida Statutes (1985), barred the Pastores' action.”

Harmony Homes, Inc. v. United States Ex Rel. Small Bus. Admin., 936 F. Supp. 907 (M.D. Fla. 1996). · cites it 6× “111 and § 95.281, Fla.Stat. (1982 & Supp.1996). Florida Statute § 95.”

Monte v. Tipton, 612 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). · cites it 3× “Section 95.281, Florida Statutes (1991), is the limitation statute applicable to mortgages.”

Show all 52 citing cases →

— 95.281(1) — 6 cases

CCM Pathfinder Palm Harbor Mgmt., LLC v. Unknown Heirs, 198 So. 3d 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). “In response, six of those unit owners filed motions to dismiss, asserting that Pathfinder’s foreclosure action was barred by the five-year statute of limitations set forth in section 95.”

Evergrene Partners, Inc. v. Citibank, N.A., 143 So. 3d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). “Citibank filed a motion to dismiss the quiet title action arguing inter alia that section 95.281(1), Florida Statutes (2012), provides in part that: (1) The lien of a mortgage or other instrument encumbering real property, herein called mortgage, .”

Pitts v. Pastore, 561 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). “Pitts contends that the statute of limitations, under section 95.281(1), Florida Statutes (1985), barred the Pastores' action.”

Zlinkoff v. Von Aldenbruck, 765 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). “§ 95.281, Fla. Stat. (1999). Here, the recorded mortgage reflected a final maturity date of February 1992.”

Roxana Quintana v. Rodriguez Fam. Inv. P'ship, LLLP, Etc. (Fla. 3d DCA 2024).

— 95.281(1)(a) — 11 cases

Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas, Etc. v. Beauvais, 188 So. 3d 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). “(iii) The majority opinion conflates the statute of repose with the statute of limitations The practical effect of the majority’s opinion is to conflate the statute of repose for foreclosure actions (section 95.281 of the Florida Statutes) with the statute of limitations for…”

Am. Bankers Life Assur. v. 2275 West, 905 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). “2275 West also moved for summary judgment claiming that foreclosure was barred by section 95.281 of the Florida Statutes. On February 13, 2003, American Bankers' motion for summary judgment was granted.”

Houck Corp. v. New River, Ltd., Pasco, 900 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). “There, the court held that "[t]he timeliness of an action to foreclose a mortgage is controlled by section 95.”

Alachua Cnty. v. Cheshire, 603 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).

Irwin v. Grogan-Cole, 590 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).

— 95.281(1)(b) — 8 cases

Houck Corp. v. New River, Ltd., Pasco, 900 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). “There, the court held that "[t]he timeliness of an action to foreclose a mortgage is controlled by section 95.”

Monte v. Tipton, 612 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). “Section 95.281, Florida Statutes (1991), is the limitation statute applicable to mortgages.”

Smith v. Branch, 391 So. 2d 797 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980).

Kisz v. Massry, 426 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).

— 95.281(2) — 6 cases

Silver Shells Corp. v. St. Maarten at Silver Shells Condo. Ass'n, 169 So. 3d 197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).

Zlinkoff v. Von Aldenbruck, 765 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). “§ 95.281, Fla. Stat. (1999). Here, the recorded mortgage reflected a final maturity date of February 1992.”

Hardey v. Shell, 144 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014).

Roxana Quintana v. Rodriguez Fam. Inv. P'ship, LLLP, Etc. (Fla. 3d DCA 2024).

— 95.281(2)(a) — 1 case

Harmony Homes, Inc. v. United States Ex Rel. Small Bus. Admin., 936 F. Supp. 907 (M.D. Fla. 1996). “111 and § 95.281, Fla.Stat. (1982 & Supp.1996). Florida Statute § 95.”

— 95.281(3) — 3 cases

Conner v. Coggins, 349 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).

Smith v. Fed. Deposit Ins., 61 F.3d 1552 (11th Cir. 1995).

Rudner v. Lyons, 395 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).

— 95.281(4) — 2 cases

Zlinkoff v. Von Aldenbruck, 765 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). “§ 95.281, Fla. Stat. (1999). Here, the recorded mortgage reflected a final maturity date of February 1992.”

Roxana Quintana v. Rodriguez Fam. Inv. P'ship, LLLP, Etc. (Fla. 3d DCA 2024).

— 95.281(l)(a) — 8 cases

Lnb-017-13, LLC v. Hsbc Bank USA, 96 F. Supp. 3d 1358 (S.D. Fla. 2015). “In Beauvais , the Third District Court of Appeal of Florida held that the hen of mortgage does not become null and void until after the expiration of the 5-year statute of limitation because Fla. Stat. § 95.281 (l)(a) 1 operates as a statute of repose and terminates the mortgage…”

Rodriguez v. Bank of Am., N.A., 49 F. Supp. 3d 1154 (S.D. Fla. 2014).

Reverse Mortg. Solution, Inc. v. The Unknown Heirs, Devisees, Grantees, Assignees, Lienors, Creditors, Trs., etc., 207 So. 3d 917 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016).

Mlecka v. Citrus Cnty., 610 So. 2d 677 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).

— 95.281(l)(b) — 7 cases

City of Riviera Beach v. Reed, 987 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

Layton v. Bay Lake Ltd. P'ship, 818 So. 2d 552 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). “When Layton filed her foreclosure action February 4, 1999, nearly ten years after the note was executed, the trial court determined that the five-year statute of limitations contained in section 95.281, Florida Statutes (1989), applied to bar Layton’s action.”

Irwin v. Grogan-Cole, 590 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).

Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. v. Burnette, 177 So. 3d 1032 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015).

— 95.281(l)(c) — 1 case

Zlinkoff v. Von Aldenbruck, 765 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). “§ 95.281, Fla. Stat. (1999). Here, the recorded mortgage reflected a final maturity date of February 1992.”

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.