A Florida appeals court has reversed a lower court's decision that dismissed Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC's claim for reformation of a mortgage. The ruling affects property owners and mortgage lenders, highlighting the importance of accurate legal descriptions in property documents.
The case, Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC v. Michael Tessenear, Cary L. Tessenear, and Steven K. Jonas, as Trustee of the 4785 Oakfield Circle Trust, Dated, February 28, 2006, was filed on August 14, 2026, under docket number 5D2025-1687. The court's decision emphasizes the distinction between reformation claims and other types of legal actions, particularly regarding their statute of limitations.
Carrington Mortgage, the appellant, is a successor mortgagee seeking to foreclose on a property in Hernando County, Florida. The dispute arose when Carrington filed a two-count amended complaint that included a request to reform the legal description of the property. This request aimed to correct the description to include a metes and bounds legal description, which is a method of describing land boundaries.
The appellees in the case include Michael Tessenear, Cary L. Tessenear, and Steven K. Jonas, who serves as the trustee of the 4785 Oakfield Circle Trust. Jonas defended against Carrington's claims, arguing that the reformation claim was barred by Florida's five-year statute of limitations, as outlined in section 95.11(2)(b) of the Florida Statutes.
The trial court agreed with Jonas and dismissed Carrington's reformation claim, concluding it was time-barred. However, Carrington appealed the decision, leading to the current ruling from the Fifth District Court of Appeal.
The court ruled that the trial court erred in dismissing Carrington's reformation claim. The judges noted, "Unlike an action seeking to enforce the terms of a written instrument, a reformation claim is a long-established equitable action that seeks to reform a written instrument where, due to a mutual mistake, the instrument as drawn does not accurately express the true intention or agreement of the parties to the instrument."
The judges further explained that the right to reformation is not absolute but depends on an equitable showing. They emphasized that the nature of a reformation claim is distinct from other legal claims and should not be subject to the five-year statute of limitations. Instead, they referenced the equitable doctrine of laches, which governs the timing of such claims.
The court's ruling has significant implications for property owners and mortgage lenders in Florida. It clarifies that reformation claims are treated differently from other legal actions, particularly in terms of time limits for filing. This distinction allows parties to seek corrections in property descriptions without being strictly bound by the five-year limitation.
This decision could lead to more cases involving reformation claims, as it opens the door for property owners and mortgage lenders to address mistakes in legal documents without the fear of being barred by time constraints. The ruling underscores the importance of ensuring that property descriptions are accurate and reflect the true intentions of the parties involved.
As for what’s next, the case has been remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the appellate court's opinion. Details were not available in the court filing regarding potential next steps or related cases.