BENJAMIN CHANCEY AND ANGELIA CHANCEY
v.
MICHAEL YOUNG AND MARION COUNTY BOARD OF COMISSIONERS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Chanceys appealed a foreclosure judgment, arguing the trial court erred by conducting trial before the case was properly at issue and without proper notice. The Fifth District Court of Appeal agreed and reversed, holding that strict compliance with Florida's rules governing when a case reaches "at issue" status and the procedures for setting trial dates is mandatory.
Yes. The trial court's failure to strictly comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.440 constituted reversible error. Because the case was tried prematurely and was not properly noticed for trial, the judgment of foreclosure was reversed.
[1] A case is at issue after any motions directed to the last pleading served have been disposed of, or if no such motions are served, 20 days after service of the last plead…
[2] Once a case is at issue, a party may file and serve a notice that the case is ready to be set for trial.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“An action is considered at issue "after any motions directed to the last pleading served have been disposed of or, if no such motions are served, 20 days after service of the last pleading."”
Establishes the legal standard for when a case becomes at issue under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.440(a)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe last pleading in the case was Michael Young's reply to the Chanceys' affirmative defenses, filed on January 6, 2020. The Chanceys filed a motion t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Case At Issue cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Benjamin Chancey and Angelia Chancey appeal a final judgment of foreclosure entered in favor of Michael Young. They contend the trial court erred by conducting the trial before the case was at issue. We agree and reverse the judgment.
An action is considered at issue “after any motions directed to the last pleading served have been disposed of or, if no such motions are served, 20 days after service of the last pleading.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.440(a). Once the case is at issue, a party may file and serve a notice that the case is ready to be set for trial. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.440(b).
Thereafter, if the trial court determines that the action is ready for trial, the trial court is to enter an order fixing a date for trial no less than 30 days from the service of the notice.
Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.440(c).
Here, the last pleading was a reply to the Chanceys’ affirmative defenses filed on January 6, 2020. On January 22, 2020, the Chanceys filed a motion to strike Young’s reply. Although the motion to strike was not ruled on until February 7, 2020, over the Chanceys’ objection, the trial court conducted the trial on February 11, 2020, which only Young, and not the trial court, had noticed.
Strict compliance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.440 is mandatory, and the failure to follow it is reversible error. Melbourne HMA, LLC v. Schoof, 190 So. 3d 169, 170 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016). “Indeed, a trial court’s obligation to hew strictly to the rule’s terms is so well established that it may be enforced by a writ of mandamus compelling the court to strike a noncompliant notice for trial or to remove a case from the trial docket.” Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125, 130 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015).
Because this matter was tried prematurely and was not properly noticed for trial, we reverse the final judgment.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
ORFINGER, COHEN and TRAVER, JJ., concur. 2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)
- Melbourne HMA, LLC v. Schoof, 190 So. 3d 169 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)