882 So. 2d 1004 - Singleton v. Greymar Associates’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
54 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably & SC14-1266 & SC14-1305 Lewis Brooke Bartram v. U.S. Bank National Association, etc. & The Plantation at Ponte Vedra v. U.S. Bank National Association, etc. & Gideon M.G. Gratsiani v. U.S. Bank National Association, etc. (2016), Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, Etc. v. Beauvais (2016)
54 state decisions — followed in 11 states
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on 283 So. 2d 97 - DeCancino v. Eastern Airlines, Inc. · Hampton Enterprises, Inc. v. Adelman · 765 So. 2d 251 - State St. Bank and Trust Co. v. Badra · 150 So. 2d 468 - Stadler v. Cherry Hill Developers, Inc. · 774 So. 2d 863 - Olympia Mortgage Corp. v. Pugh
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Acceleration and foreclosure predicated upon subsequent and different defaults present a separate and distinct issue.... This seeming variance from the traditional law of res judicata rests upon a recognition of the unique nature of the mortgage obligation and the continuing obligations of the parties in that relationship.....If res judicata prevented a mortgagee from acting on a subsequent default even after an earlier claimed default could not be established, the mortgagor would have no incentive to make future timely payments on the note. The adjudication of the earlier default would essentially insulate her from future foreclosure actions on the note — merely because she prevailed in the first action. Clearly, justice would not be served if the mortgagee was barred from challenging the subsequent default payment solely because he failed to prove the earlier alleged default.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“res judicata does not bar successive foreclosure claims.... Here, the subsequent and separate alleged defaults under the note created a new and independent right in the [lender] to accelerate payment on the note in a subsequent foreclosure action.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is not necessarily barred by res judicata.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.