From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hicks v. Mid-Florida Prod. Credit

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Aug 7, 1979
374 So. 2d 566 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

Summary

holding "foreclosure of a non-purchase money mortgage on Florida homestead property is not a forced sale and therefore does not violate Article X, Section 4, Fla. Const."

Summary of this case from Demayo v. Chames

Opinion

No. MM-162.

August 7, 1979.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Levy County, W.O. Beauchamp, J.

J. Michael Davis of the Law Offices of Lansing J. Roy, Gainesville, for appellants.

Bevin G. Ritch of Lowry Ritch, Gainesville, for appellee.


The lower tribunal rendered an order of foreclosure, holding that foreclosure of a non-purchase money mortgage on Florida homestead property is not a forced sale and therefore does not violate Article X, Section 4(a), Fla. Const. We affirm. Hart v. Sanderson's Administrators, 18 Fla. 103 (1881).

MILLS, C.J., and ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hicks v. Mid-Florida Prod. Credit

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Aug 7, 1979
374 So. 2d 566 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

holding "foreclosure of a non-purchase money mortgage on Florida homestead property is not a forced sale and therefore does not violate Article X, Section 4, Fla. Const."

Summary of this case from Demayo v. Chames
Case details for

Hicks v. Mid-Florida Prod. Credit

Case Details

Full title:JACK C. HICKS, JR., AND ERMA L. HICKS, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS, v…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Aug 7, 1979

Citations

374 So. 2d 566 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

Citing Cases

Pirolo v. Century First National Bank

As to the other point on appeal, we also find no error. See Hart v. Sanderson's Administrators, 18 Fla. 103…

Morris v. Marshall

E.g., United States Building Loan Ass'n v. Stevens, 93 Mont. 11, 17 P.2d 62 (1932); Karcher v. Gans, 13 S.D.…