PHH Mortgage Corporation v. Eric V. Schreiber a/k/a Eric Schreiber and Kathy Schreiber

Summary

The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed a final judgment for Eric and Kathy Schreiber in a second mortgage foreclosure action brought by PHH Mortgage Corporation. The court held that collateral estoppel barred relitigation of whether PHH complied with HUD regulations before initiating foreclosure, while noting that res judicata did not bar the action because it involved a different default period. The court also rejected the borrowers’ request to permanently bar future foreclosure proceedings.

Holdings

1. Collateral estoppel barred relitigation of whether PHH Mortgage Corporation complied with HUD regulations before initiating foreclosure because the identical issue had previously been fully litigated and determined between the same parties in a final decision by a court of competent jurisdiction.
2. Res judicata did not bar the second foreclosure action because the second complaint alleged a different default period, including more recent defaults than those alleged in the first foreclosure case.
3. When a mortgage foreclosure action is involuntarily dismissed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(b), with or without prejudice, the dismissal revokes the acceleration, reinstates the mortgagor's right to continue making payments, and preserves the mortgagee's right to seek later acceleration and foreclosure based on subsequent defaults.
4. The lender abandoned any argument challenging the trial court's application of collateral estoppel because it did not present an argument explaining why that ruling was incorrect.

Questions Presented

1. Whether collateral estoppel barred relitigation of the issue of the lender's compliance with HUD regulations before initiating foreclosure.
2. Whether res judicata barred the second foreclosure action because it involved the same parties and mortgage as the earlier foreclosure action.
3. Whether an involuntary dismissal of a foreclosure action permanently bars the mortgagee from later seeking acceleration and foreclosure.

Disposition

affirmed