Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

GENERAL STORAGE v. FEDERAL DEPOSIT

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Apr 23, 1991
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

PER CURIAM.

The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied based upon the respondent's concession, which we accept, that any factual determinations made in the non-jury mortgage foreclosure action will have no res judicata or collateral estoppel effect as to any of the issues to be determined by the jury on the petitioners' third-party complaint against the FDIC as receiver. See McGregor v. Provident Trust Co., 119 Fla. 718, 733, 162 So. 323, 329 (1935); Couch Constr. Co. v. Florida Dep't of Transp., 537 So.2d 631, 632 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988), rev. denied, 545 So.2d 1366 (Fla. 1989); Restatement (Second) of Judgments ยง 36(2) (1982); see also Langley v. FDIC, 484 U.S. 86, 108 S.Ct. 396, 98 L.Ed.2d 340 (1987); Beighley v. FDIC, 868 F.2d 776, 783 (5th Cir. 1989); Trigo v. FDIC, 847 F.2d 1499 (11th Cir. 1988); FDIC v. La Rambla Shopping Center, 791 F.2d 215, 218-21 (1st Cir. 1986); American Surety Co. v. Normandy State Bank, 237 Mo. App. 39, 167 S.W.2d 436 (1943). Given this concession, we conclude that the petitioners' right to a jury trial on the third-party complaint was not violated below by scheduling the mortgage foreclosure action for trial before the trial on the third-party complaint. Compare Spring v. Ronel Refining, Inc., 421 So.2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).

Certiorari denied.