TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Pepper v. First Union National Bank

Pepper v. First Union Nat'l Bank, 605 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 14, 1992
Docket
No. 91-3287
Judges
Per Curiam
Citations
605 So. 2d 10161992 WL 280771

Opinion — Per Curiam

605 So.2d 1016 (1992)

David L. PEPPER, Appellant,

v.

FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA, a national banking association, Appellees.

No. 91-3287.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

October 14, 1992.

*1017 Philip T. Weinstein and David M. Garvin of Weinstein & Garvin, P.A., Miami, for appellant.

Douglas H. Morford and William L. Joel of Ulmer, Murchison, Ashby & Taylor, Jacksonville, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court's entry of a summary final judgment in favor of appellee, First Union National Bank of Florida, in its mortgage foreclosure suit against appellant, David L. Pepper, based upon the release agreement executed by Pepper on October 5, 1989, in which he released the claims and defenses he now seeks to assert in defense of the foreclosure action. Pepper is precluded from defending against the enforcement of the release on the sole ground that he did not read the document before signing it. See Allied Van Lines, Inc. v. Bratton, 351 So.2d 344 (Fla. 1977); Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Benton, 467 So.2d 311 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Moreover, Pepper is precluded, as a matter of law, from defending against the enforcement of the release based on his claim of fraudulent inducement, because, due to the hostile and antagonistic relationship that existed between himself and First Union during the months prior to the execution of the release, Pepper could not reasonably rely on any representations made by First Union. See Pieter Bakker Management, Inc. v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan, 541 So.2d 1334 (Fla. 3d DCA) (on rehearing), review denied, 549 So.2d 1014 (Fla. 1990).

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN, MINER and WOLF, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1993: 11995: 12001: 12016: 119932026peak 1993 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Hall v. Burger King Corp.912 F. Supp. 1509 (S.D. Fla. 1995)
  2. Moriber v. Dreiling194 So. 3d 369 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)
  3. Brown v. Keystone State Bank614 So. 2d 38 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
  4. Barnwell v. Masten802 So. 2d 482 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Most recent

  1. Moriber v. Dreiling194 So. 3d 369 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)
  2. Barnwell v. Masten802 So. 2d 482 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
  3. Hall v. Burger King Corp.912 F. Supp. 1509 (S.D. Fla. 1995)
  4. Brown v. Keystone State Bank614 So. 2d 38 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Allied Van Lines, Inc. v. Bratton, 351 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 1977) 66
Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, ETC. v. Benton, 467 So. 2d 311 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985) 34
Pieter Bakker Mgt., Inc. v. First Fed. S&L Ass'n, 541 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989) 16
Evans v. State, 605 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list