DocketNumber: No. 92-1613
Citation Numbers: 614 So. 2d 1149, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 1846, 1993 WL 36270
Judges: Dell, Owen, Polen, William
Filed Date: 2/17/1993
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
Appellant brings this non-final appeal from the trial court’s order disbursing surplus funds on deposit with the court in connection with the foreclosure sale of a
We reverse the trial court’s order disbursing proceeds to the Condominium Association and the Pearsons. In Rosen v. Dorn-Korthe, Inc., 126 Fla. 717, 171 So. 646 (Fla. 1936), the court stated:
It appears to be settled beyond all question that one claiming a surplus or the right to share in a surplus resulting from a sale under foreclosure must either own the equity of redemption at the time of the sale or must be one then holding a lien or vested right in the property. In Jones on Mortgages (7th Ed.) § 1684, the author says:
‘Surplus money arising from a sale of land under a decree of foreclosure stands in the place of the land itself in respect to liens thereon or vested rights therein.’
Rosen, 171 So. at 648.
At the time of the foreclosure sale the Pearsons did not own the equity of redemption or hold a lien or vested right in the property. Therefore, pursuant to Ro-sen, the Pearsons were not entitled to share in the surplus resulting from the sale. Nor were the Pearsons entitled to payment or reimbursement from these surplus funds of a maintenance fee apparently owing to the Juno Ocean Club Condominium Association. See Miller v. Stavros, 174 So.2d 48 (Fla.3d DCA 1965) (purchaser at foreclosure sale not entitled to reimbursement out of surplus funds to which the mortgagor or his trustee in bankruptcy were entitled).
We reverse with instructions that appel-lees deposit the improperly disbursed funds ($2,806.68) into the registry of the court.
REVERSED.