A Takings Claim By Any Other Name . . . May Not Succeed
Posted on Feb 22, 2019 in Constitutional Law | Comments Off on A Takings Claim By Any Other Name . . . May Not Succeed
In Hillcrest Property, LLP v. Pasco County, 2019 WL 580259 (11th Cir. Feb. 13, 2019), the Eleventh Circuit confirmed that allegedly unlawful application of a land-use ordinance does not give rise to a substantive due process claim. As the court previously held in McKinney v. Pate, 20 F.3d 1550 (11th Cir. 1994), “executive action never gives rise to a substantive-due-process claim...
Arbitration on a Hot Shingled Roof: Homeowners Bound by Arbitration Agreement Printed on Shingle Wrapping
Posted on Nov 9, 2018 in Arbitration | Comments Off on Arbitration on a Hot Shingled Roof: Homeowners Bound by Arbitration Agreement Printed on Shingle Wrapping
Homeowners are bound by a mandatory-arbitration provision printed conspicuously on the wrapping around packages of shingles when the packages are opened and installed by the homeowners’ roofers, as a matter of Florida contract law. Dye v. Tamko Building Products, Inc., 2018 WL 5729085 (11th Cir. Nov. 2, 2018). Two Florida homeowners whose roofers had purchased, opened, and installed...
Federal Law Does Not Prevent Foreclosure Against Surviving Spouse of “Reverse-Mortgage” Borrower If Contractually-Authorized
Posted on Sep 10, 2018 in Consumer Protection | Comments Off on Federal Law Does Not Prevent Foreclosure Against Surviving Spouse of “Reverse-Mortgage” Borrower If Contractually-Authorized
The federal statute that prevents HUD from insuring a reverse mortgage that permits foreclosure while the borrower’s surviving spouse lives in the mortgaged property does not similarly prohibit the lender from foreclosing after the borrower’s death, as long as the foreclosure is otherwise permitted by the loan documents. Estate of Jones v. Live Well Fin., Inc., __ F.3d __, 2018 WL...
Eleventh Circuit Invalidates Liquidated Damages Provision As Impermissible Penalty
Posted on Jun 27, 2018 in Commercial Law | Comments Off on Eleventh Circuit Invalidates Liquidated Damages Provision As Impermissible Penalty
In Autauga Quality Cotton Association v. Crosby, 2018 WL 3097948 (June 25, 2018), the Eleventh Circuit invalidated a liquidated damages provision, holding it to be an impermissible penalty under Alabama law. Appellant Autauga Quality Cotton Association is a not-for-profit cotton-marketing association based in Central Alabama whose mission is to provide price stability to both farmers...
Forfeited Deposit Not Capital Gain in Real Estate Deal
Posted on Mar 15, 2018 in Taxation | Comments Off on Forfeited Deposit Not Capital Gain in Real Estate Deal
In a case of first impression, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed that a taxpayer could not treat as long-term capital gain its retention of a nonrefundable deposit after a would-be buyer defaulted on an agreement to purchase real property used in the taxpayer’s trade or business. CRI-Leslie, LLC v. Comm’r, 882 F.3d 1026 (11th Cir. 2018). Under the facts of the case, the taxpayer,...