WESLEY SNIPES, APPELLANT,
v.
CHASE MANHATTAN MORTGAGE CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLEES
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 court held that a party's voluntary general appearance waives personal jurisdiction defenses and that a party's failure to protect their own interests cannot be grounds to vacate a judgment to the detriment of innocent parties.
[1] A general appearance in an action waives any claim of lack of personal jurisdiction.
[2] A party's failure to protect their own interests during litigation cannot alone justify vacating judicial acts to the detriment of innocent parties.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWesley Snipes appealed the denial of post-trial motions after a final judgment of foreclosure was entered against him. Snipes argued he did not volunt…
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 Waiver Of Personal Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, J.
Wesley Snipes appeals the denial of various post-trial motions, following the entry of a final judgment of foreclosure against him. Reduced to its essence, Snipes contends that the trial court erred by concluding that he voluntarily appeared in the action, thereby subjecting himself to the court’s jurisdiction, and further erred when it failed to set aside the final judgment because he had valid defenses to Chase Manhattan’s foreclosure complaint. We affirm.
Our standard of review of an order ruling on a motion for relief from judgment filed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) is whether there has been an abuse of the trial court’s discretion. Tilden Groves Holding Corp. v. Orlando/Orange County Expressway, 816 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). Here, Snipes filed a pro se “Notice of Waiver of Service of Process and Notice of Appearance,” waiving formal service of process and entering a notice of general appearance in the foreclosure action. Snipes’s notice of general appearance acted as a waiver of any claim he might have based on a lack of personal jurisdiction. See McKelvey v. McKelvey, 323 So. 2d 651, 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (holding that a general appearance ordinarily will be affected by making a motion involving the merits of plaintiffs claim and his right to maintain the suit and secure the relief sought).
Snipes further argues entitlement to relief, contending that he had meritorious defenses to the mortgage foreclosure action. Snipes’s contention notwithstanding, his failure to take the steps necessary to protect his own interest during the litigation cannot, standing alone, be grounds to vacate judicially authorized acts to the detriment of other innocent parties. “The law requires certain diligence of those subject to it, and this diligence cannot be lightly excused.” John Crescent, Inc. v. Schwartz, 382 So. 2d 383, 385 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).
Finding no abuse of discretion on the trial court’s part, the order on appeal is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Barco Holdings, LLC v. Terminal Inv. Corp., 967 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…tion. “Our standard of review of an order ruling on a motion for relief from judgment filed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) is whether there has been an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.” Snipes v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp., 885 So. 2d 899, 900 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Contrary to Barco’s contentions, the record is clear that there was no confusion as to Korman’s status as a trustee. In Kor-man’s deposition, taken one month prior to the first summary judgment hearing, Kor-man clearly tes…
-
Leach v. Aria Salehpour & Heron Cove Constr., Inc., 19 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…standard of review on an order ruling on a motion for relief from judgment filed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) is whether there has been an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.’ ” (quoting Snipes v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp., 885 So. 2d 899, 900 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004))). Salehpour, however, contends that the trial court did not simply enter an order on a rule 1.540 motion, but instead granted a new trial on its own motion pursuant to rule 1.530(d). According to Salehpour, this action by…
-
Twylah Adams v. Est. OF Thomas Dean Henderson, Sr., 155 So. 3d 485 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…udgment filed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) is whether there has been an abuse of the trial court’s discretion.” J.J.K. Int’l, Inc. v. Shivbaran, 985 So. 2d 66, 68 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (quoting Snipes v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp., 885 So. 2d 899, 900 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)) (internal quotation marks omitted). The Estate stated two grounds for relief in Motion One and two grounds in Motion Two. Although the first grounds asserted in both motions were different (excusable neglect in not filing…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- John Crescent, Inc. v. Schwartz, 382 So. 2d 383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- McKELVEY v. McKELVEY, 323 So. 2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Tilden Groves Holding Corp. v. Orlando/Orange Cnty. Expressway, 816 So. 2d 658 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)