Cases from cite.case.law:

CREDO LLC, v. SPEYSIDE INVESTMENTS CORPORATION,, 259 So. 3d 893 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . See § 702.01, Fla. Stat. (2010) (Equity) ("All mortgages shall be foreclosed in equity. . . .

IN RE A. FAILLA, N. A. N. v. N. A., 838 F.3d 1170 (11th Cir. 2016)

. . . . §§ 702.01-702.11. . . .

IN RE A. FAILLA, N. A. N. v. N. A., 838 F.3d 1170 (11th Cir. 2016)

. . . . §§ 702.01-702.11. . . .

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, v. L. HAGSTROM R., 203 So. 3d 918 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . And section 702.01 provides that “[a]ll mortgages shall be foreclosed in equity.” . . .

ALUIA, v. DYCK- O NEAL, INC., 205 So. 3d 768 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . See § 702.01 (“All mortgages shall be foreclosed in equity.”); cf. ch. 55, Fla. . . .

IN RE CLONINGER, v., 548 B.R. 839 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 2016)

. . . . § 702.01. . . .

BRINDISE v. U. S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,, 183 So. 3d 1215 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . . § 702.01, Fla. Stat. (2012-2014); see Singleton v. . . .

BEEPOT, v. JP MORGAN CHASE NATIONAL CORPORATE SERVICES, INC., 628 F. App'x 1008 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . Beepots filed a motion to alter or amend under Rule 59(e), Fed.R.Civ.P., arguing that Florida Statute § 702.01 . . . The district court denied the motion, concluding that § 702.01 was not an intervening change in the law . . . Kirian, 579 So.2d 730, 732-33 (Fla.1991) (“Haven”), that the portion of § 702.01 upon which the Beepots . . . The Beepots then filed a second motion to alter or amend, arguing in relevant part that § 702.01 was . . . ’ contention that the court erred in denying their first motion to alter or amend on the basis of § 702.01 . . .

BEEPOT, v. JP MORGAN CHASE NATIONAL CORPORATE SERVICES, INC., 626 F. App'x 935 (11th Cir. 2015)

. . . Florida Statute § 702.01 provides, in its entirety, that: “All mortgages shall be foreclosed in equity . . . Stat. § 702.01. . . . Accordingly, § 702.01 violates the Florida constitution “to the extent it conflicted] with rule 1.270 . . . The district court’s order in this case disposed of the Beepots’ argument under Florida Statute § 702.01 . . . After determining that § 702.01 was not an intervening change in the controlling law, and that the Beepots . . .

HSBC BANK USA, N. A. v. PEREZ, G. N. A. U. S. N. A. N. A. N. A. WMALT, 165 So. 3d 696 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Finally, the inapplicability of section 702.01 to determine priority between competing mortgage assignments . . . Because section 702.01 does not apply as between HSBC and LaSalle Bank, HSBC’s earlier perfection of . . .

KINNEY f k a v. COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING, L. P., 165 So. 3d 691 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . .” § 702.01, Fla. Stat. (2012). . . . It found further support in section 702.01, which the court pointed out “[d]oes not provide that the . . .

U. S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, v. F. FARHOOD a k a F. E. Jr., 153 So. 3d 955 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . . § 702.01, Fla. Stat. . . .

IN RE BELTWAY LAW GROUP, LLP, a k a, 514 B.R. 341 (Bankr. D.D.C. 2014)

. . . See D.C.Code §§ 29-702.01(c), 29-703.03 and 29-704.04(a). . . .

ARSALI, v. CHASE HOME FINANCE LLC,, 121 So. 3d 511 (Fla. 2013)

. . . See § 702.01, Fla. Stat. (2010) (Equity) (“All mortgages shall be foreclosed in equity. . . .

ANDERSON, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 527 F. App'x 602 (9th Cir. 2013)

. . . . §§ 13-3401,13-3407,13-3418,13-610, 13-701, 13-702, 13-702.01 and 13-801 committed on MAY 21, 2002. . . .

UNITED STATES v. GOMEZ- HERNANDEZ,, 680 F.3d 1171 (9th Cir. 2012)

. . . .] §§ 13-3601(A), 13-1204(A)(2), (B), 13-1203(A)(1), 13-701, 13-702, 13-702.01 and 13-801.” . . . .] §§ 13-1001, 13-1204(A)(2), (B), 13-1203(A)(1), 13-701, 13-702, 13-702.01 and 13-801.” . . .

ROYAL PALM CORPORATE CENTER ASSOCIATION, LTD. a a LLC, a LLC, a a V. III, v. PNC BANK, NA, NA,, 89 So. 3d 923 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . .” § 702.01, Fla. Stat. (2008). . . .

UNITED STATES v. ANTONIO- AGUSTA,, 672 F.3d 1209 (10th Cir. 2012)

. . . . §§ 13-1203, 13-1204, 13-701, 13-702, 13-702.01, and 13-1801. . . . Aggravated Assault, Class 3 nondangerous felonies, in violation of A.R.S. §§ 13-1203, 13-1204, 13-701, 13-702.01 . . . A.R.S. [§ ] § 13-1203, 1204, 701, 702, 702.01, 801 Date of Offense: 06/07/2006 Non Dangerous — Non Repetitive . . . apprehension of imminent physical injury, in violation of A.R.S. §§ 13-1203, 13-1204, 13-701, 13-702, 13-702.01 . . .

JV, v. LITTLE HOUSE, LLC,, 50 So. 3d 691 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . See § 702.01, Fla. . . .

DENT, v. H. HOLDER Jr., 627 F.3d 365 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . . § 13-3401, 3408, 3418, 701, 702, 702.01, and 801. . . . . . § 13-1001, 2502, 2503, 31-342, 13-701, 702, 702.01, and 801. . 8 U.S.C. § 1101(43)(F). . INS Det. . . .

BROWN, v. H. HOLDER, Jr., 381 F. App'x 683 (9th Cir. 2010)

. . . in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 13-3401, 3405, 3418,1001, 301, 302, 303, 304, 701, 702, 702.01 . . .

In PHILLIPS, 439 B.R. 892 (Bankr. N.D. Ala. 2010)

. . . . § 702.01 (1998) et seq. . . .

WILLIAMSON, v. H. HOLDER Jr., 358 F. App'x 899 (9th Cir. 2009)

. . . of Marijuana for Sale” in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 13-3401, 3405, 3418, 1001, 701, 702.01 . . .

BREZILIEN, v. H. HOLDER,, 569 F.3d 403 (9th Cir. 2009)

. . . Arizona Revised Statutes Sections 13 — 1204(A)(11), (B), - 1203(A)(1), -1001, -3601(A), -701, -702, - 702.01 . . .

In HUGHES,, 402 B.R. 404 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2008)

. . . . §§ 702.01, et seq. (governing mortgage foreclosures). . . .

BARRAGAN- LOPEZ, v. B. MUKASEY,, 508 F.3d 899 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . 13-1002, 13-3405(A)(2), 13-3405(B)(6), 13-3401, 13-301, 13-302, 13-303, 13-304, 13-701, 13-702, 13-702.01 . . .

HERNANDEZ- MENDOZA, v. R. GONZALES,, 233 F. App'x 724 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . conviction for possession of marijuana under Revised Statute sections 13-3401, 13-3405, 13-701, 13-702, 13-702.01 . . .

HERNANDEZ- MENDOZA, v. R. GONZALES,, 537 F.3d 976 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . conviction for possession of marijuana under Revised Statute sections 13-3401, 13-3405, 13-701, 13-702, 13-702.01 . . .

CUNNINGHAM v. CALIFORNIA, 549 U.S. 270 (U.S. 2007)

. . . . §13-702.01 (West Supp. 2006); Kan. Stat. Ann. §§21-4716(b), 21-4718(b) (2005 Supp.); Minn. . . .

BECKER, v. R. GONZALES,, 473 F.3d 1000 (9th Cir. 2007)

. . . Paraphernalia,” a Class 6 felony, in violation of Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 13-3401, 3408, 3415, 701, 702.01 . . .

STOKES, II, v. B. SCHRIRO,, 465 F.3d 397 (9th Cir. 2006)

. . . Ann. § 13-702.01(E) (1993). . . . . This conclusion is reinforced by the legislative activity surrounding § 13-702(C) and § 13-702.01(E), . . . Ann. § 13-702.01(E) (1993) (emphasis added). . . . Ann. § 13-702.01(E) (2005) (emphasis added). . . . Id. § 13-702.01(1). Further amendments in 2006 preserved these changes, in effect. See 2006 Ariz. . . .

In DANIELS, v. USA,, 350 B.R. 619 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2006)

. . . . § 702.01, which requires the state court to sever any counterclaims from foreclosure actions. . . .

In AMHERST TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,, 335 B.R. 502 (Bankr. D.N.H. 2006)

. . . King, Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 702.01 (15th ed. rev.2005). . . .

THOMPSON, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, v. WESTERN STATES MEDICAL CENTER, 535 U.S. 357 (U.S. 2002)

. . . PH 404, PH 702.01 (2002); 22 Tex. Admin. Code §291.36 (2002). . . .

BLATCHLEY, v. BOATMAN S NATIONAL MORTGAGE, INC., 706 So. 2d 317 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . . § 702.01, Fla. Stat. (1995) (“All mortgages shall be foreclosed in equity.”). . . .

In SAN DIEGO SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA ASSOCIATION,, 201 B.R. 978 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1996)

. . . establishing the invalidity of the claim for this purpose is on the objector. 4 Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 702.01 . . .

O. HANCE, v. DIME SAVINGS BANK OF NEW YORK, FSB, FSB, a f k a, 678 So. 2d 11 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . See § 702.01, Florida Statutes; Cross v. . . .

In B. HART, 184 B.R. 849 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1995)

. . . . § 702.01 (1987). . . .

In LAKE STATES COMMODITIES, INC. In W. COLLINS,, 173 B.R. 642 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 1994)

. . . establishing the invalidity of the claim for this purpose is on the objector. 4 Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 702.01 . . . general objection to a claim, which will not justify disallowance of a claim. 4 Collier on Bankruptcy, ¶ 702.01 . . .

T. NORRIS M. v. PAPS, F., 615 So. 2d 735 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . . § 702.01, Fla.Stat. (1987). . . .

D. PEARLMAN, v. NATIONAL BANK OF NEW YORK CITY,, 600 So. 2d 5 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . While the statute requiring severance, section 702.01, Florida Statutes (1987), has been declared unconstitutional . . .

WILLIAMS, v. FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA,, 591 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Haven held that section 702.01, Florida Statutes (1987), which mandated severance of counterclaims in . . .

In CALIFORNIA GARDENS APARTMENTS, LTD. II, II, II,, 130 B.R. 509 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 1991)

. . . . § 702.01 was procedural only and, to the extent it conflicted with a similar Florida Supreme Court . . . In reaching this conclusion, the Haven court stated: “the amendments [to Fla.Stat. § 702.01] were part . . .

OAKBROOKE ASSOCIATES, LTD. v. INSURANCE COMMISSIONER OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA,, 581 So. 2d 943 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Kirian, 579 So.2d 730 (Fla.1991) addressed the constitutionality of section 702.01, Florida Statutes . . . Procedure 1.270(b), the decision contains the following footnote: Specifically, the amendments to § 702.01 . . . final staff analysis of the House Commerce Committee, that legislation amended §§ 697.07, 201.022 and 702.01 . . .

J. STONE, v. PRIVATBANKEN, A S, a, 580 So. 2d 882 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . decision under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.270(b) rather than a compulsory one under section 702.01 . . .

HAVEN FEDERAL SAVINGS LOAN ASSOCIATION, v. F. KIRIAN,, 579 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 1991)

. . . Savings & Loan Association (Haven Federal) appeals a district court’s express declaration that section 702.01 . . . The trial court granted the motion to sever, finding the language of section 702.01 mandatory and that . . . The court held that section 702.01, to the extent it conflicts with rule 1.270(b), unconstitutionally . . . Thus, section 702.01 is unconstitutional to the extent it conflicts with rule 1.270(b). . . . Specifically, the amendments to § 702.01, Fla. . . .

DYKES, A. W. F. M. T. M. E. H. C. v. TRUSTBANK SAVINGS, F. S. B. f k a, 567 So. 2d 958 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . See § 702.01, Fla.Stat. (1987); Wade v. Clower, 94 Fla. 817, 114 So. 548 (1927). . . .

In GROWERS PROPERTIES NO. LIMITED, A No. A No. A No. A, 117 B.R. 1015 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1990)

. . . . § 702.01. . . .

LOTUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, v. PAPERBACK SOFTWARE INTERNATIONAL, 740 F. Supp. 37 (D. Mass. 1990)

. . . See Compendium II at § 702.01 (“computer programs” should be registered as “nondramatic literary works . . .

F. KIRIAN, v. HAVEN FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION,, 560 So. 2d 380 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . granting a motion to sever legal counterclaims from a foreclosure action under the authority of section 702.01 . . . Haven moved to sever the counterclaims for separate trial, citing amended section 702.01: All mortgages . . . Appellants argued that construing section 702.01 as absolutely requiring the trial court to sever the . . . Appellants moved for rehearing, arguing that section 702.01 as construed by the trial court violates . . . We find that section 702.01 is procedural in nature and that its language is unequivocally mandatory. . . .

P. FOX, v. C. CRUANAS,, 557 So. 2d 136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Plackard, 412 So.2d 415 (Fla.3d DCA 1982); § 702.01, Fla.Stat. (1987). . . .

In NEW YORK PRODUCE AMERICAN KOREAN AUCTION CORPORATION, d b a A K, 106 B.R. 42 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 1989)

. . . See generally, 4 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 702.01[2]; see also, H.R.Rep. . . .

ROYAL PALM SAVINGS ASS N. v. PINE TRACE CORPORATION,, 716 F. Supp. 1416 (M.D. Fla. 1989)

. . . TRIAL AND SEVER AMENDED COUNTERCLAIM In this last motion, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant relies on Section 702.01 . . . Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff asserts that Section 702.01 is unconstitutional. . . . The Court on consideration finds that the part of Section 702.01, which requires the severance of the . . .

In COHOES INDUSTRIAL TERMINAL, INC., 90 B.R. 67 (S.D.N.Y. 1988)

. . . See generally, 4 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 702.01[2]. . . .

In TARTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,, 4 B.R. 655 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1980)

. . . nonpriority’ is not; although it is stated in the legislative history.” 4 Collier on Bankruptcy, para. 702.01 . . .

v., 71 T.C. 671 (T.C. 1979)

. . . period is computed from the time the power is exercised if the power is a general power as defined in s. 702.01 . . . In the instant case, decedent’s power was not a general power of appointment as defined in sec. 702.01 . . . Stat. sec. 702.01(4) provides in part: (4) “General power” means a power exercisable in favor of the . . .

E. C. BRADBERRY, v. ATLANTIC BANK OF ST. AUGUSTINE,, 336 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1976)

. . . . § 702.01, Florida Statutes (1975), provides that “[a]ll mortgages shall be foreclosed in chancery, . . .

BUTLER, v. J. MIRABELLI,, 179 So. 2d 868 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1965)

. . . See. 702.01, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. . . .

WEST CORP. a k a a a k a a v. EQUITY CAPITAL COMPANY, a, 174 So. 2d 626 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1965)

. . . . § 702.01, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. . . .

FAMILY INVESTORS, INC. a v. NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a, 136 So. 2d 646 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1961)

. . . Sections 702.01 and 702.-02, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., provide two methods for the foreclosure sale of mortgaged . . . The first is a foreclosure in chancery with the aid of a special master (§ 702.01) and the second is . . .

UNITED STATES v. KRAPF,, 285 F.2d 647 (3d Cir. 1960)

. . . Part 702.01 of the Manual has, since March 30,1959, directed that every person taken into the custody . . .