Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation v. James Beekman

Summary

The Fourth District Court of Appeal of Florida held that the trial court erred by granting a mortgage loan modification that was not requested in the pleadings and was not tried by consent. The court further held that the trial court lacked authority to impose an unbargained-for modification contract unsupported by competent substantial evidence. The judgment was reversed and the case remanded for a new trial, with leave to amend the pleadings if the applicable standard was met.

Holdings

1. A court may not grant relief wholly outside the pleadings unless the issue was tried by express or implied consent. Because the mortgage holder objected to modification-related testimony, had a continuing objection to matters outside the evidence, lacked notice that modification was sought as a remedy, and could have presented additional evidence, the loan-modification issue was not tried by consent.
2. The trial court exceeded its authority by imposing a new loan-modification contract that was not bargained for and whose terms lacked evidentiary support.
3. The borrower should be allowed to amend his answer and affirmative defenses if he meets the established legal standard governing amendment of pleadings.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court could grant a loan modification when the borrower had not requested that relief in his pleadings and the issue was not tried by express or implied consent.
2. Whether the trial court exceeded its authority by imposing a new, unbargained-for loan-modification contract lacking evidentiary support.
3. Whether the trial court erred in denying the borrower's motion to amend his answer and affirmative defenses and to assert counterclaims.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded