Stevens v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Fla: 5DCA | Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516 ... This violated Stevens's due process rights and requires reversal

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Stevens v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Fla: 5DCA | Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516 … This violated Stevens’s due process rights and requires reversal

Stevens v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Fla: 5DCA | Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516 … This violated Stevens’s due process rights and requires reversal

 

MELVIN L. STEVENS, JR., Appellant,
v.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Appellee.

Case No. 5D13-3472.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Opinion filed March 7, 2014.
Melvin L. Stevens, Jr., Altamonte Springs, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.

ORFINGER, J.

Melvin L. Stevens, Jr. appeals the trial court’s order denying his motions for relief from judgment.[1] Stevens contends that the final judgment of foreclosure should be set aside because he was never served with the notice of issue or the order setting the trial. We agree and reverse.

Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, filed a foreclosure complaint against Stevens. For a time, Stevens was represented by counsel. However, upon motion, the court authorized Stevens’s counsel to withdraw. The court then directed all papers and pleadings to be served on Stevens at two designated addresses. In time, Nationstar’s counsel filed a notice that the action was at issue and ready for trial. That notice was not served on Stevens as previously ordered. Instead, it was mailed to his former counsel. The trial court’s order setting the case for trial was served only on Nationstar’s counsel. Not surprisingly, Stevens did not appear for the trial and a final judgment of foreclosure was entered against him. He timely filed his various motions for relief from judgment. Without elaboration, the trial court denied the motions.

Every pleading and paper filed in any court proceeding must be served on each party or their counsel. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516. This requirement is to satisfy the constitutional requirement of due process. Here, neither the notice of issue nor the order setting trial was served on Stevens. This violated Stevens’s due process rights and requires reversal. See Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So. 2d 289, 294 (Fla. 2006) (holding that to satisfy due process, any notice given must be reasonably calculated, under all circumstances, to apprise interested parties of pendency of action and afford them opportunity to present objections); Heritage Casket & Vault Ind., Inc. v. Sunshine Bank, 428 So. 2d 341, 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). For these reasons, we reverse the final judgment and remand this matter for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

PALMER and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED.

[1] Stevens filed several motions in the trial court, delineating them as a Motion to Set Aside the Final Judgment, a supplement thereto, and an Amended and Verified Motion to Set Aside the Final Judgment. Like the trial court, we consider them in the context of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540, which authorizes motions for relief from judgment.

Down Load PDF of This Case

© 2010-17 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Comments

comments

This post was written by:

- who has written 8613 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA.

CONTROL FRAUD | ‘If you don’t look; you don’t find, Wherever you look; you will find’ -William Black

Contact the author

Leave a Reply

GARY DUBIN LAW OFFICES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HAWAII and CALIFORNIA
Advertise your business on StopForeclosureFraud.com
Kenneth Eric Trent, www.ForeclosureDestroyer.com

Archives