Summary
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed a final judgment denying Credit Acceptance Corporation’s motion for default final judgment in a deficiency action. The court held that the secured party was not required to prove the commercial reasonableness of the collateral sale because the debtor did not place that issue in dispute, and remanded for entry of judgment for the deficiency balance, prejudgment interest, and costs.
Holdings
- A secured party need not prove that disposition of collateral was commercially reasonable unless the debtor places the secured party's compliance in issue.
- The trial court erred in denying Credit Acceptance's motion for default judgment because Credit Acceptance was not required to prove the commercial reasonableness of the collateral sale under the circumstances.
Questions Presented
- Whether a secured party seeking a deficiency judgment must prove that disposition of collateral was commercially reasonable when the debtor has not placed the secured party's compliance in issue.
- Whether the trial court erred by denying Credit Acceptance's motion for default final judgment on the ground that Credit Acceptance had not proven the commercial reasonableness of the collateral disposition.
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (3)
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Arwine, 276 So. 3d 275, 275 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)(followed)
- S. Devs. & Earthmoving, Inc. v. Caterpillar Fin. Servs. Corp., 56 So. 3d 56, 60 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)(followed)
- Textron Fin. Corp. v. Lentine Marine Inc., 630 F. Supp. 2d 1352, 1358 (S.D. Fla. 2009)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…