Opinion
CASE NO. 1D17–0323
10-16-2017
DYCK–O'NEAL, INC., Appellant, v. William WIGGINS, Appellee.
David M. Snyder, David M. Snyder Professional Association, Tampa; Susan B. Morrison of the Law Offices of Susan B. Morrison, P.A., Tampa; Daniel C. Consuegra and Joshua D. Moore of the Law Offices of Daniel C. Consuegra, Tampa; and Scott Zimmer of the Law Offices of Daniel C. Consuegra, Riverview, for Appellant. Austin Tyler Brown, Parker & DuFresne, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellee.
David M. Snyder, David M. Snyder Professional Association, Tampa; Susan B. Morrison of the Law Offices of Susan B. Morrison, P.A., Tampa; Daniel C. Consuegra and Joshua D. Moore of the Law Offices of Daniel C. Consuegra, Tampa; and Scott Zimmer of the Law Offices of Daniel C. Consuegra, Riverview, for Appellant.
Austin Tyler Brown, Parker & DuFresne, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Higgins v. Dyck–O'Neal, Inc., 201 So.3d 157 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) (holding that a party is not entitled to pursue a separate action for deficiency judgment where the foreclosure complaint includes a prayer for a deficiency judgment and the foreclosure court reserves jurisdiction to enter a deficiency judgment); see also Dyck–O'Neal, Inc. v. Lanham, 214 So.3d 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (certifying conflict between this Court's decision in Higgins and decisions by the other four district courts of appeal).
ROBERTS, BILBREY, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.