HomeMy WebLinkAbout1191 i ~
~
r,
i~?~I~:) ~`~1.
[N "THE CIItCUIT' CUUR 1' Or "l~-1 E ti1NETE~N'l~i
Jt1D[C1At~ CIRCUIT IN AND FOR INDIAN RNER
CC)11N"1'lt F 1__UR IDA.
- C ~1 ~ ~ 1~Q. 73 -616
jAIviES C. .~L~,E:1. ~R. arx3 j
'tii-ARY "r. ALI..f.:'~1, ?
~
~ Plaintiffs, ~
i
vs `
i
STANLEY i~, t'I~ILLtA~riSON and ~
i~0 R I 5 L4. I i_. L i A\,1;~~;v,
Defenclants. )
;
DEFICIEyC;Y Jt?JC;'~sE~IT
This cause havinQ came on to b2 heari9 u~on the `~~totion of the
F'latntiffs, JA.~~~85 C, t1LI..Eti, 5ft. and `iARY T, ,'~t~i_Li.i, his wife, for
a Deficiency ;udgment agai~j~t the Defendants, ~T_~'`:I,i::' iZ, l~tiiI_LIt1~4SON
a~d IX?~I~ ;~i. ~;'I(.I__[r1i~/i:~Oti~ t1~5 wife, a:~d it a~pearing to ti.~ Court,
and tt~ Co~rt finding that che Froceeds of the sale o# the ;:~ortgaged
~-remises ~ti~ere ir.~ufficient to ~-ay rhe indebtedness found to be due and
owing to JA~,iL~ C. ~~~_.~.EN, :~R. and '~~I~RY "I'. ALLE,~:, his wife, from
the [~fe~:'..~;1_ . .`.:;i.,i:`i' '.i''Ii_~_i:~.:L'::t:i: ~tld i)0~2I:i i\:, ~~`ILI_IA~/1jQN~
hi5 evife, a:~~} ti~e ~:c3~~ri f+~rtiier iz3tciizir ti.at tlie ~ Iai:~tiffs. Jr1~~tE~; G.
, s,: _ i ~;:~I ~i;~:~' :.Y:. : ~t : T. . :i _ ~11:3 "fV lte~ are ~~nlitled to a UeftcieQCy
iUCl~'~:~L'1C ` ~ = f 1~, "~:1~: , . . ~.i\, .i.: i i~. ~ ;'-:;.l:A, `~i'~~ti and I~ORIS
_ _ ~.g~~ ~I~ ?_t_.~
~.`~=.,i , ':i~ ~.vif~, i., ct~~ f~f ~:i ;i~tecn i h~uaanci Four
:~unurec~ T!:irey F~ivc. i.~~itar:_ a::~~ ~.i :t.i:~ lYi:~, u~:an consideration,
it iti
~R~J;~tZi:~ ,~~:_%,I'C~GI?i: tl,~~t J-;.,::;. , .1I_.~,~:~ .:it. and :~,~ARY
~r. ALLE`, I~is wife, are aw~tr~e~ ci ~:wficie~~cy ;~~ci~~~:~::~,t ~~oainot the
Jefendants, STA~I~_.EY ~.`~I~ ,_1~'_:.:._<";'4 an:1 ~.-~~~.ci:: ::i. .~i..__;.IA~i~OV,
~ ~ 2~4 FA~E ~~.90
SHARP, !OH(YSTON b BROtYN, ~RTTORNEYS /1T LAW, YERO 8E/1CH, FLQRlDA '
=