The Appellate Brief

Last week, the Fifth District Court of Appeal, reviewing a case from the circuit court in Orlando, agreed with our argument that section 701.04(2), requiring satisfactions of fully paid mortgages, does not require a party to provide a partial satisfaction of mortgage – even when the promissory note held by that party is fully paid.

You can read the opinion here: Richeson v. South’s Custom Construction, Inc., 5D20-1496 (April 23, 2021)

Alexander Appellate Law just scored a big win for a client in Palm Beach County.

After winning her case against her landlord for unlawful eviction, the client timely moved for attorney’s fees – but the motion contained a clerical error and didn’t specify the statutory ground for fees. Over a year later, after a challenge to the motion, the trial court ended up denying the motion for failure to state its grounds with particularity.

You can read the opinion here: Nugent v. Michelis, 4D20-523 (Fla. 4th DCA March 10, 2021)

Alexander Appellate Law P.A. recently secured a victory for their clients in Miami. After briefing and oral argument, the Third District Court of Appeal agreed that an anti-assignment provision contained in a homeowners insurance policy application was unenforceable.

You can read the written opinion here: Extreme Emergency Fire and Water Restoration v. Certain Underwriter’s at Lloyd’s of London, 3D20-0005 (Dec. 16, 2020)