Holland v. McCullen
Florida District Court of Appeal
764 So.2d 810 (2000)
- Written by Rich Walter, JD
Facts
Michael Holland (codefendant) mortgaged his residence to Midfirst Bank (plaintiff). The mortgage note provided that in case of default, the bank could call in Holland's loan and foreclose on the property. Holland later sold the property to Jerry and Catherine McCullen (codefendants). Holland and the McCullens contractually agreed that they would give him a purchase-money wraparound second mortgage in return for his help in financing the purchase. The contract provided that the McCullens would make payments to Holland on the wraparound mortgage, and that Holland would continue making payments to the bank on the first mortgage. The contract also provided that Holland would indemnify the McCullens in case he defaulted on the first mortgage. A few years later, Holland and the bank disputed the interpretation of the mortgage's hazard-insurance clause. The bank declared Holland to be in default, called in his loan, and sued Holland and the McCullens to foreclose on the property. The McCullens crossclaimed against Holland for breach of contract, indemnification, and civil theft. Based on the parties' stipulation that Holland defaulted on the first mortgage, the trial court ordered foreclosure. The court also entered summary judgment for the McCullens on their crossclaim, and Holland appealed to the state's district appellate court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Campbell, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.