## Facts

- A 90-year-old homeowner executed a quitclaim deed conveying her residence to an individual; the deed recited consideration as “love and affection” and was recorded with only the minimum documentary stamps.
- The grantee later sold the property to third-party purchasers for about \$50,000.
- The purchasers financed most of the price with a loan secured by a purchase-money mortgage held by a savings and loan association.
- After the sale and mortgage, the original grantor sued to cancel (1) her deed to the grantee, (2) the deed to the purchasers, and (3) the mortgage, alleging the initial deed was void for lack of “valuable consideration” and lack of any stated familial relationship.
- The trial court found the initial deed lacked valuable consideration but ruled it nonetheless conveyed legal title; it further found the purchasers and mortgagee lacked actual notice of any alleged defect.
- A district court of appeal initially affirmed without opinion, then granted rehearing en banc and reversed, while also stating en banc rehearing was proper only for “strict decisional conflict” comparable to the Florida Supreme Court’s discretionary conflict standard.
- The case reached the Florida Supreme Court on a certified question concerning the proper scope of en banc rehearing in district courts.

## Issues

1. Whether a Florida district court of appeal may grant rehearing en banc to maintain decisional uniformity without meeting the Florida Supreme Court’s “strict decisional conflict” standard used for discretionary review.
2. Whether a recorded deed reciting consideration as “love and affection,” without showing a familial relationship on its face, is effective to pass legal title as against subsequent bona fide purchasers and a mortgagee without actual notice of defects.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court held that district courts of appeal, when exercising en banc authority under Florida appellate rules, are not limited by the Florida Supreme Court’s discretionary conflict-jurisdiction standards.
- The Court ruled that district courts may develop their own standards of “decisional uniformity” for en banc proceedings.
- On the merits, the Court rejected the appellate court’s result and protected the interests of the subsequent purchasers and the mortgagee who took for value without actual notice.
- The Court quashed the district court’s en banc decision and remanded for proceedings consistent with its opinion, effectively reinstating the trial court’s judgment.

## Legal Principles

- District courts of appeal may use en banc rehearing as an internal mechanism to maintain decisional uniformity and are not confined to the Florida Supreme Court’s “strict decisional conflict” threshold for discretionary review.
- A properly recorded deed that appears valid on its face may be relied upon by subsequent purchasers and mortgagees who pay value and lack actual notice of alleged defects affecting the transfer between the original parties.
- Claims that a conveyance lacked valuable consideration, even if potentially relevant between the original grantor and grantee, will not defeat the rights of bona fide purchasers and encumbrancers without actual notice who relied on the recorded chain of title.

## Conclusion

The Florida Supreme Court confirmed that district courts have broad discretion to define when en banc rehearing is needed to maintain decisional uniformity, and it held that a recorded quitclaim deed reciting “love and affection” did not permit the original grantor to unwind the interests of later bona fide purchasers and a purchase-money mortgagee who took for value without actual notice.


Chase Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Schreiber, 479 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1985)