702.036
Finality of foreclosure judgment.
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
702.036 Finality of foreclosure judgment.—
(1) As used in this section, the term “property” means real property.
(2)(a) In any action or proceeding in which a party seeks to set aside, invalidate, or challenge the validity of a final judgment of foreclosure of a mortgage or other lien, or to establish or reestablish a lien or encumbrance on the property in abrogation of the final judgment of foreclosure of a mortgage or other lien, the court shall treat such request solely as a claim for monetary damages and may not grant relief that adversely affects the quality or character of the title to the property, if:
1. The party seeking relief from the final judgment of foreclosure of the mortgage or lien was properly served in the foreclosure lawsuit as provided in chapter 48 or chapter 49.
2. The final judgment of foreclosure of the mortgage or lien was entered as to the property.
3. All applicable appeals periods have run as to the final judgment of foreclosure of the mortgage or lien with no appeals having been taken or any appeals having been finally resolved.
4. The property has been acquired for value, by a person not affiliated with the foreclosing mortgageholder, the foreclosing lienholder, or the foreclosed owner, at a time in which no lis pendens regarding the suit to set aside, invalidate, or challenge the foreclosure appears in the official records of the county where the property was located.
(b) This subsection does not limit the right to pursue any other relief to which a person may be entitled, including, but not limited to, compensatory damages, punitive damages, statutory damages, consequential damages, injunctive relief, or fees and costs, which does not adversely affect the ownership of the title to the property as vested in the unaffiliated purchaser for value.
(3) For purposes of this section, the following, without limitation, shall be considered persons affiliated with the foreclosing mortgageholder or foreclosing lienholder:
(a) The foreclosing mortgageholder, the foreclosing lienholder, or any loan servicer for the mortgage or lien being foreclosed;
(b) Any past or present owner or holder of the mortgage or lien being foreclosed;
(c) Any maintenance company, holding company, foreclosure services company, or law firm under contract to any entity listed in paragraph (a), paragraph (b), or this paragraph, with regard to the mortgage or lien being foreclosed; or
(d) Any parent entity, subsidiary, or other person who directly, or indirectly through one or more intermediaries, controls or is controlled by, or is under common control with, any entity listed in paragraph (a), paragraph (b), or paragraph (c).
(4) After foreclosure of a mortgage based upon the enforcement of a lost, destroyed, or stolen note, a person who is not a party to the underlying foreclosure action but who claims to be the person entitled to enforce the promissory note secured by the foreclosed mortgage has no claim against the foreclosed property after it is conveyed for valuable consideration to a person not affiliated with the foreclosing lender or the foreclosed owner. This section does not preclude the person entitled to enforce the promissory note from pursuing recovery from any adequate protection given pursuant to s. 673.3091 or from the party who wrongfully claimed to be the person entitled to enforce the promissory note under s. 702.11(2) or otherwise, from the maker of the note, or from any other person against whom it may have a claim relating to the note.
(5) If a party seeks relief from a final judgment foreclosing a mortgage or lien, or files a separate action attacking such a final judgment, and the party claims that it holds or held a lien superior in right, priority, or dignity to the mortgage or lien foreclosed in the judgment, the court must award reasonable attorney fees to the party prevailing on the claim. This subsection applies whether the litigation seeking relief from the final judgment occurs in the case in which the judgment was entered or in any separate case or proceeding.
History.—s. 4, ch. 2013-137; s. 3, ch. 2023-215.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 2016–2025 · leading case: Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Diaz
Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Diaz (2017)
“address section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2016),- titled “Finality of mortgage foreclosure judgment,” which protects a.”
Suzana Popescu v. Laguna Master Association, Inc., St. Michael Properties, LLC, Supreme Title & Escrow, Inc. and Fay S. (2016)
“Section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2013), limits an action or proceeding seeking to set aside, invalidate, or challenge and requires a court to treat such a proceeding as a claim for monetary damages if certain conditions apply.”
90 Cwelt-2008 v. Yacht Club at Portofino Condo Assoc. (2018)
“Further, the trial court properly exercised its discretion in vacating the certificate of sale and the certificate of title, as a necessary and logical extension of its prior order vacating the final judgment. In granting relief to JP Morgan from the void judgment, it would make…”
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v. CHI PENG TAN (2021)
“The circuit court found the final judgment was void as to Wells Fargo; that its motion to vacate was not filed within a reasonable time; and, alternatively, that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), precluded the relief sought in the motion.”
Wells Fargo Bank, N. A. v. Allen, U.S. Bank Trust National Association (2025)
“Because the trial court erred in its application of section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2018), we reverse the final judgment and remand for the entry of a judgment for Wells Fargo that grants its mortgage foreclosure claim and denies the Allens' quiet title claim.”
VISTA FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC AND ALLA POLISHKO v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, etc. (2021)
“The only issue relevant to this appeal is whether the Tselesins, the third-party purchasers of the foreclosed property, are protected by the Finality of Mortgage Foreclosure statute, section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019).”
LAZARA A. RODRIGUEZ v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, etc. (2021)
“Rodriguez, has filed an emergency motion to stay eviction pending appeal of the trial court’s order denying her motion for rehearing of its order finding section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2013) constitutional and granting third-party purchaser’s emergency motion to lift the…”
SHIRLEY SUTTON v. WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc. (2023)
“1 We reject the successful bidders’ contention that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), bars relief.”
FELIX SOTO v. CARROLLWOOD VILLAGE PHASE I I I (2021)
“In his third amended counterclaim against Carrollwood Village, Soto sought, among other things, a declaration of rights regarding the construction of section 702.036(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2017), which governs the finality of mortgage foreclosure judgments and a declaration…”
CRIMSON 27, LLC v. TAYLOR MADE LENDING, LLC, AND KALVAITIS HOLDINGS, LLC (2022)
“See also § 702.036(1), Fla. Stat. Accordingly, we reverse in part, only as to the portion of the summary final judgment of foreclosure that liquidated previously unliquidated attorney’s fees and costs, and remand for an evidentiary hearing to resolve the issue of fact regarding…”
SHIRLEY SUTTON v. WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., etc. (2023)
“1 We reject the successful bidders’ contention that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), bars relief, as this issue was neither raised nor litigated below.”
Ada Albors Gonzalez v. Federal National Mortgage Association (2021)
“”); Fla. Stat. § 702.036 (2)(b) (for purposes of finality of a mortgage foreclosure judgment, all past and present owners or holders of the loan being foreclosed are considered affiliated with the foreclosing lender).”
— 702.036(1) — 1 case
CRIMSON 27, LLC v. TAYLOR MADE LENDING, LLC, AND KALVAITIS HOLDINGS, LLC (2022)
“See also § 702.036(1), Fla. Stat. Accordingly, we reverse in part, only as to the portion of the summary final judgment of foreclosure that liquidated previously unliquidated attorney’s fees and costs, and remand for an evidentiary hearing to resolve the issue of fact regarding…”
— 702.036(1)(a) — 5 cases
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v. CHI PENG TAN (2021)
“The circuit court found the final judgment was void as to Wells Fargo; that its motion to vacate was not filed within a reasonable time; and, alternatively, that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), precluded the relief sought in the motion.”
VISTA FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC AND ALLA POLISHKO v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, etc. (2021)
“The only issue relevant to this appeal is whether the Tselesins, the third-party purchasers of the foreclosed property, are protected by the Finality of Mortgage Foreclosure statute, section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019).”
FELIX SOTO v. CARROLLWOOD VILLAGE PHASE I I I (2021)
“In his third amended counterclaim against Carrollwood Village, Soto sought, among other things, a declaration of rights regarding the construction of section 702.036(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2017), which governs the finality of mortgage foreclosure judgments and a declaration…”
SHIRLEY SUTTON v. WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, etc. (2023)
“1 We reject the successful bidders’ contention that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), bars relief.”
Wells Fargo Bank, N. A. v. Allen, U.S. Bank Trust National Association (2025)
“Because the trial court erred in its application of section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2018), we reverse the final judgment and remand for the entry of a judgment for Wells Fargo that grants its mortgage foreclosure claim and denies the Allens' quiet title claim.”
— 702.036(1)(a)(1) — 1 case
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v. CHI PENG TAN (2021)
“The circuit court found the final judgment was void as to Wells Fargo; that its motion to vacate was not filed within a reasonable time; and, alternatively, that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), precluded the relief sought in the motion.”
— 702.036(1)(a)(2) — 1 case
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v. CHI PENG TAN (2021)
“The circuit court found the final judgment was void as to Wells Fargo; that its motion to vacate was not filed within a reasonable time; and, alternatively, that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), precluded the relief sought in the motion.”
— 702.036(1)(a)(3) — 1 case
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v. CHI PENG TAN (2021)
“The circuit court found the final judgment was void as to Wells Fargo; that its motion to vacate was not filed within a reasonable time; and, alternatively, that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), precluded the relief sought in the motion.”
— 702.036(1)(a)(4) — 2 cases
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. v. CHI PENG TAN (2021)
“The circuit court found the final judgment was void as to Wells Fargo; that its motion to vacate was not filed within a reasonable time; and, alternatively, that section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019), precluded the relief sought in the motion.”
VISTA FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC AND ALLA POLISHKO v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, etc. (2021)
“The only issue relevant to this appeal is whether the Tselesins, the third-party purchasers of the foreclosed property, are protected by the Finality of Mortgage Foreclosure statute, section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2019).”
— 702.036(l)(a) — 1 case
Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Diaz (2017)
“address section 702.036, Florida Statutes (2016),- titled “Finality of mortgage foreclosure judgment,” which protects a.”
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.