New Changes to the Florida
Rules of Civil Procedure Take Effect
on January 1, 2025
The Florida Supreme Court has made numerous changes to the Rules of Civil Procedure for Court cases that will go into effect on January 1, 2025. Most of the changes are designed to streamline civil case administration, better ensure timely judicial decisions, and generally improve efficiency in civil litigation. The amendments will impact a variety of areas, ranging from pretrial procedure, discovery and motion practice, trial, and judicial case management. This article will focus on the rule changes most likely to impact the typical types of Credit Union cases.
Changes to Judicial Case Management
The revisions to Rule 1.200 (Case Management; Pretrial Procedure) effectively overhaul case management procedures. Courts will now assign all civil cases to one of three tracks within 120 days of being filed. The three tracks are “general,” “streamlined,” and “complex” (governed by Rule 1.201). The chief judge of each judicial circuit is required to enter a standing order addressing specific case management requirements. The three tracks will not be based upon the dollar value of the case but rather based upon the amount of judicial attention needed and can take into account the local needs, resources, and automation. I anticipate that the majority of typical Credit Union cases will be designated as “streamlined” because this track is intended for cases with limited discovery needs, well-established legal issues, and an anticipated trial length of no more than three (3) days. That being said, Courts are now required to issue a case management order that specifies the projected trial period and setting deadlines for various stages of the litigation (i.e., service, resolution of motions, and mediation). The new rule will strictly enforce established deadlines and expressly disfavors continuances.
Mandatory Initial Disclosures
Under the amended Rule 1.280(a), parties must now provide initial disclosures within sixty (60) days of filing a complaint, bringing Florida’s rules more in line with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. These disclosures must include information such as (1) the names and contact details of individuals likely to have discoverable information; (2) a description of documents and tangible things that may be used to support claims or defenses; (3) a computation of damages; and (4) any insurance agreements that may satisfy all or part of a judgment. Additionally, there is also an ongoing duty to supplement these disclosures as new information emerges. Rule 1.280(f) imposes a duty on parties to promptly supplement or correct their disclosures or discovery responses if they learn that the information provided is incomplete or incorrect.
Changes to Conferral Requirement
Under Rule 1.202, parties are required to confer before filing non-dispositive motions (typically related to discovery or amending pleadings), promoting collaboration and the resolution of disputes without judicial intervention. Notably, parties are not required to confer on motions for summary judgment, nor those seeking injunctive relief. The duty is imposed upon the moving party to ensure a meet and confer occurs prior to the filing of the motion. The movant is also required to file a Certificate of Conferral with the motion, addressing the date and means of the conference and whether there was an agreement as to the relief sought and the efforts made to obtain such an agreement.
Exemptions to Conferral requirement are as follows: movant or nonmovant is an unrepresented party (pro se); motion to extend time for service of process; default; summary judgment; writ of possession; dismiss for failure to state claim or dismiss for failure to prosecute.
Changes to Summary Judgment
Further reform includes Rule 1.510, which clarifies the timing for filing and responding to motions for summary judgment. Responses must now be filed within sixty (60) days of the motion’s service, rather than the hearing date, ensuring parties have sufficient time to prepare.
Conclusion
The new changes to Florida’s Rules of Civil Procedure should improve the efficiency and transparency of civil litigation by introducing stricter case management practices, improving discovery, and limiting delays by both Judges and lawyers. Please do not hesitate to contact a lawyer at SVL with any questions.
These changes took effect July 1, 2023.
Enforcing Matured Mortgage Loan
In my twenty-eight years of practicing law, I have found that clients and lawyers are often confused about when a mortgage is no longer enforceable. In Florida, a recent court case highlights the issues and the law when it comes to enforcing a mortgage loan that has matured.
On December 11, 2024, the Third District Court of Appeal issued its opinion in the case of Quintana v. Rodriquez Family Investment Partnership, LLLP. The primary facts surrounding this legal dispute involved a mortgage entered into by Mr. and Ms. Quintana on April 10, 2009, to secure the payment of a promissory note held by the Rodriquez Family Investment Partnership (RFIP). The mortgage specified a maturity date of April 10, 2012. On September 3, 2009, the parties entered into a mortgage modification to secure additional funds owed to RFIP. The mortgage modification did not modify the maturity date. The borrowers continued to pay the mortgage until August 24, 2016.
In 2018, RFIP filed suit against Ms. Quintana, as she was the only living borrower at that time. The suit sought to foreclose the mortgage. In response to the lawsuit, Ms. Quintana raised the defense that the complaint was untimely under Section 95.281, Florida Statutes.
Section 95.281 provides that the lien of a mortgage terminates after the expiration of the following time periods: (1) if the maturity date is notated on the mortgage, then five (5) years after the date of maturity; or (2) if the maturity date is not notated on the mortgage, it is twenty (20) years from the date of the mortgage. The issue in this case is whether the post-maturity payments made by Ms. Quintana extended or tolled the period in Section 95.281. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of RFIP, and Ms. Quintana appealed that order.
On appeal, the court held that Section 95.281, Florida Statutes, is a statute of repose and not a statute of limitation. A statute of repose differs from a statute of limitation in that it prevents the cause of action from arising after its time limit. On the other hand, a statute of limitation provides a time limit for filing suit after the accrual of a cause of action.
The court found that the only way to extend the time limit in Section 95.281 is for the parties to execute an extension agreement, as provided in subsection 2 of the statute. The fact that the borrower continued to make payments beyond maturity does not extend the time period within which a party must seek to enforce its lien on the mortgaged property.
Why is this case critical? Often, Credit Unions have mortgage loans on their books where the mortgage has matured, but there is still a balance due and owing, and the borrower continues to make monthly payments. Typically, this happens when the borrower has been granted skip-payments, extensions, or had forced placed taxes or insurance added to the loan. The Credit Union’s core system may not recognize the loan has matured, and it continues to treat the loan as ongoing, showing the next monthly due date owed. If the Credit Union is not careful, it could find itself in this situation, with an expired mortgage more than five years past maturity with no rights to foreclose on the property.
Should you have questions about mortgage maturity dates, statute of limitations, or statute of repose on mortgage loans, please do not hesitate to contact a lawyer at SVL.
Staff Spotlight on Ana Barba
Ana was born and raised in Tepatitlán de Morelos, Jalisco, a small town about fifty miles away from Guadalajara. She describes Tepatitlán de Morelos, Jalisco, as a very quiet place with old traditions, making it a very cozy city. Ana studied both Plastic Arts and Humanities in college.
In August of this year, Ana joined our SVL Team. The legal field was not actually in her field of vision for a career; however, she has found that working at the firm has been a very enriching experience. Ana has enjoyed learning many new things and likes that she is challenged every single day. Currently, she is assisting in our collections department but has also prepared demand letters for our Credit Union clients, as well as set up files in our bankruptcy department. Ana, you are an amazing asset to our team.
In her spare time away from the office, Ana loves to ride her bike and spend time with her dog, a ten-year-old Husky named Wilson. He keeps her busy with his nonstop energy! She also enjoys cooking. Her favorite is making cold dishes like ceviche and tuna salad. Ana is also an avid reader of fantasy novels, as well as mystery and horror books. One additional fun fact about Ana is she spent a couple of semesters learning French while in college and is currently retaking lessons on her own to learn even more. Ana, your drive is contagious and we love having you as a part of our team!
Staff Spotlight on Felisha Richardson
Felisa was born and raised in Tallahassee, Florida, and obtained her Associate’s degree from Tallahassee State College, followed by a Bachelor’s degree in Criminology, with a minor in Physiology and Law, from Florida State University. While growing up, Felisa was involved in cheerleading, playing volleyball, and attending church events.
Felisa joined the SVL team in July of this year and is our newest Collections Legal Assistant. She likes that Sorenson Van Leuven has a family dynamic. She says “it sounds cliché, but it’s very comfortable here. When I started, I knew this is where I wanted to be simply by the laughs I heard and by the interactions I watched.” Felisa, we are so glad you are here and love how you describe SVL!
While out of the office, Felisa enjoys spending time with her friends and family, watching movies, and having her “relaxation time.” She also loves to sing, get pampered at the hair/nail salon, and likes to aggravate her parents by making them do TikTok videos with her. That would be fun to watch!
We appreciate you, Felisa, and are grateful for you and your dedication to our firm.
Holiday Party
On Saturday, December 14, 2024, the SVL Team gathered at Jim and Michelle Sorenson’s home to celebrate the holiday season. Staff, spouses, and friends had a great time spreading Christmas cheer with snacks, drinks, and games. We are thankful that we have such a great work family to spend these special times with. Thank you to Jim and Michelle for hosting!
