JO-ANN T. BEAULIEU, APPELLANT,
v.
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, APPELLEE
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.
Appellant's motion to vacate a foreclosure judgment was denied because her default admitted all well-pled allegations of the complaint, including the mortgagee's ownership of the note, and a Rule 1.540(b) motion cannot substitute for appeal or rehearing.
A defaulting defendant admits all well-pled factual allegations of the complaint, including the mortgagee's ownership and holder status of the note and mortgage, and cannot later challenge those allegations via a motion to vacate.
[1] A mortgagor who defaults in a foreclosure action admits all well-pled allegations that the mortgagee is the owner and holder of the note and mortgage and cannot later cha…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“When a default is entered, the defaulting party admits all well-pled factual allegations of the complaint.”
The court cited State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Horkheimer to establish that defaults operate as admissions of complaint allegations.
Jo-Ann Beaulieu defaulted in a foreclosure action brought by JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. The original note and mortgage were filed in 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 Judicial Estoppel cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant challenges the denial of her motion to vacate a final judgment of foreclosure. She claims that appellee had no “constitutional standing” to bring the suit because appellee had not proved that it was duly assigned the mortgage note prior to the suit being filed. Because appellant defaulted, she cannot contest, as she tries to do in her post-judgment motion, the allegations of the complaint that the appel-lee was the owner and holder of the note and mortgage. See State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Horkheimer, 814 So.2d 1069, 1072 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“When a default is entered, the defaulting party admits all well-pled factual allegations of the complaint.”); Chem. Residential Mortg. v. Rector, 742 So.2d 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (failure of defendant to answer complaint waived any denial of complaint’s allegations that the mortgagee plaintiff was the owner and holder of the note and mortgage and that defendant had defaulted thereon). The original note and mortgage were filed in the foreclosure action and entitled appellee to the final judgment of foreclosure it obtained. See State St. Bank and Trust Co. v. Lord, 851 So.2d 790, 791 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).
*366Appellant’s other challenges contend that the documents submitted in support of the complaint and the motion for summary judgment were faulty or inadmissible. Motions pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) cannot be used as a substitute for a motion for rehearing or an appeal. See Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co. v. Freeman, 884 So.2d 164, 167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). Appellant is not entitled to relief.
Affirmed.
DAMOORGIAN and GERBER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Americas, 83 So. 3d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…, it follows that it cannot be raised for the first time in a motion to set aside a judgment under rule 1.540(b)(4). A rule 1.540(b) motion is not a substitute for a motion for rehearing or an appeal. See Beaulieu v. JPMorgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 80 So. 3d 365 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Even where a judgment is entered in favor of a plaintiff that lacks standing, the judgment is merely voidable, not void. See Jones-Bishop v. Estate of Sweeney, 27 So. 3d 176, 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). A judgment that is merely vo…
-
Gafoor Jaffer and Nina Jaffer v. Chase Home Fin., LLC, 155 So. 3d 1199 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…e and the copy attached to the complaint. The filing of the original note several months prior to the summary judgment hearing proved Chase’s entitlement to the final judgment of foreclosure. See Beaulieu v. [*1203] JPMorgan Chase Bank, Nat’l Assn., 80 So. 3d 365, 365 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (“Because appellant defaulted, she cannot contest ... the allegations of the complaint that the appellee was the ... holder of the note and mortgage.... The original note and mortgage were filed in the foreclosure action and…
-
Dage v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co., 95 So. 3d 1021 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…. A voidable judgment may not be set aside under rule 1.540(b)(4). Sterling Factors Corp., 968 So. 2d at 665; Phadael, 83 So. 3d at 895 (citing Miller v. Preefer, 1 So. 3d 1278, 1282 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)); Beaulieu v. JPMorgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n, 80 So. 3d 365, 365 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (“Because appellant defaulted, she cannot contest, as she tries to do in her post-judgment motion, the allegations of the complaint that the appellee was the owner and holder of the note and mortgage.”) (citing State Farm Mu…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Horkheimer, 814 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co. v. Freeman, 884 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Chem. Residential Mortg. v. Rector, 742 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- State St. Bank & Tr. Co. for Holders of Bear Stearns Mortg. Sec. Inc. Mortg. Pass-Through Certificates v. Hartley Lord, 851 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)