WALLIS, J.
Appellant, TD Bank, N.A. ("TDB"), appeals the trial court's denial of a motion seeking a deficiency judgment ("Deficiency Motion") in a foreclosure action, arguing that the trial court erred in ruling that TDB was required to introduce the earlier-entered Final Judgment of Foreclosure ("Final Judgment") into evidence.
In May 2013, the trial court granted summary judgment of foreclosure in favor of TDB and entered the Final Judgment against Appellees, Robert M. Graubard, individually, and as Trustee for the Graubard Revocable Trusts (collectively "Graubard"). In the Final Judgment, the trial court established that Graubard owed $241,554.86 to TDB and specifically reserved jurisdiction "to enter further orders that are proper, including, without limitation, attorneys' fees, writs of possession and deficiency judgments." Graubard did not appeal the Final Judgment.
On September 16, 2013, TDB filed the Deficiency Motion, seeking the $241,554.86 amount awarded in the Final Judgment, plus $3,521.28 in post-judgment interest, minus the fair market value of the property. TDB asserted that the fair market value of the property was $160,000 and, accordingly, requested a deficiency judgment of $85,076.14. TDB specifically referenced the Final Judgment's award of $241,554.86 several times and attached the Final Judgment and the certificate of title to the Deficiency Motion.
The trial court held a January 15, 2014 hearing on the Deficiency Motion. The only witness at the hearing, real estate appraiser John Mullins, was called by TDB to establish the fair market value of the property. Mullins testified, over objection, that he appraised the property and the structures on the property at $160,000. Graubard contested the valuation testimony on cross-examination, but provided no competing evidence of value. At the end of the hearing, the trial court granted Graubard's motion for an involuntary dismissal, ruling that TDB failed to provide prima facie evidence of the debt amount on the foreclosed property.
We review de novo a trial court's ruling on a motion for directed verdict.
"[A] lender's legal claim for a deficiency `has consistently been tried as a continuation of the foreclosure suit under [the Florida Constitution].'"
Once a trial court enters judgment of foreclosure, the judgment "fixe[s] the validity, priority and extent of [the] debt."
The reintroduction of a final judgment of foreclosure is not necessary to establish a lender's right to a deficiency judgment in the same case.
Here, because the Final Judgment was entered in the same case as the later Deficiency Motion, the trial court erred in ruling that TDB failed to present evidence sufficient for a deficiency judgment. The Final Judgment fixed the amount of Graubard's debt to TDB at $241,554.86. TDB presented evidence at the hearing that the fair market value of the foreclosed property was $160,000. Graubard's motion to dismiss the Deficiency Motion was not based on the lack of valuation evidence, but rather on TDB's alleged failure to prove the amount of Graubard's debt. The evidence is clear that Graubard's total debt to TDB was greater than the fair market value of the property. Absent findings of fact demonstrating equitable reasons to deny the Deficiency Motion, the trial court was required to enter a deficiency judgment. We reverse the trial court's denial of the Deficiency Motion and remand for entry of a deficiency judgment in favor of TDB in the amount of $85,076.14, plus interest.
REVERSED and REMANDED with INSTRUCTIONS.
PALMER and ORFINGER, JJ., concur.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED.