alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### HAMILTON INVESTMENT TRUST, Appellant, v. ESCAMBIA DEVELOPERS, INC., M. G. Drake, and Associated Developers of Florida, Inc., Appellees.

No. BB-54.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Nov. 10, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 29, 1977.

Hugh M. Taylor and W. Robert Olive, Jr. of Bryant, Dickens, Franson & Miller, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Jack S. Graff and William Rankin of Levin, Warfield, Middlebrooks, Graff, Ma-bie, Rosenbloum & Magie, Pensacola, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment denying a deficiency following a mortgage foreclosure.

The testimony before the trial judge was concentrated upon the value of the property. One such witness placed the value at a sum less than the indebtedness, while another witness placed the value at a sum which exceeded the indebtedness.

“The discretion to grant (or deny) deficiency decrees in mortgage foreclosure suits, provided for by statute (Sec. 702.06, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.), is not absolute and unbri-*884died but is a ‘sound judicial discretion’, *Carlson v. Becker,*Fla.1950, 45 So.2d 116. The exercise of such discretion in denial of a deficiency decree must be supported by disclosed equitable considerations which constitute sound and sufficient reasons for such action. *Scheneman v. Barnett,*Fla. 1951, 53 So.2d 641; *Kissling v. McCarthy,*Fla.App.1958, 100 So.2d 434; *Kurkjian v. Fish Carburetor Corporation,*Fla.App.1962, 145 So.2d 523; *Colmes v. Hoco, Inc. of Dade County,*Fla.App.1963, 152 So.2d 524. Therefore, the determinative question here is whether the chancellor abused discretion in denying the mortgagees’ motion for a deficiency decree.” *Larsen v. Allocca,*Fla. App., 187 So.2d 903.

If the value of the foreclosed property exceeds the debt, the chancellor is authorized in denying a deficiency. There is competent substantial evidence in this record to conclude that the trial judge found this was the case.

The judgment is, therefore, AFFIRMED.

BOYER, C. J., RAWLS, J., and MCDONALD, PARKER LEE, Associate Judge, concur.
EXHIBIT
13.2



CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO

18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



The
certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December
31, 2015 (the “Report”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, as adopted
pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002.



I,
Angel Santodomingo Martell, Chief  Financial Officer of Banco Santander (Brasil), S.A., certify that, to the best of my
knowledge:



1.	the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and



2.	the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of Banco Santander (Brasil), S.A.



Date:
April 29, 2016



|By: | /s/ Angel
    Santodomingo Martell
|--- | ----------------------------------
|    | Name:                             
|    | Title: