SALOON SAO, APPELLANT,
v.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Set Aside Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant challenges the trial court’s order denying his motion to quash service of process, set aside judgment, sale, and order of writ of eviction based upon the court’s failure to conduct an evidentiary hearing. Appellee properly concedes error. “[A] trial court is required to conduct an evidentiary hearing before entering an order denying a motion to set aside a judgment.” Palacio v. Alaska Seaboard Partners Ltd. P’hip, 50 So.3d 54 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (citing Seal v. Brown, 801 So.2d 993, 994-95 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)). “Furthermore, if a moving party’s allegations raise a colorable entitlement to relief, a formal evidentiary hearing and appropriate discovery is required.” M Therefore, we REVERSE and REMAND for an evi-dentiary hearing.
LEWIS, THOMAS, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. One Seagrove Place Owners Ass'n, Inc. (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)…trial court so misconceived the law as to require reversal.”). Where a party moving under rule 1.540 sets forth a colorable claim for relief, the trial court is required to hold an evidentiary hearing. See Saloon Sao v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 109 So. 3d 896 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). The Bank’s motion set forth a colorable claim, and the trial court held an evidentiary hearing. But the Bank furnished no transcript of the hearing in the appendix filed in this appeal. In the absence of a transcript, w…
Authorities Cited
- Seal v. Brown, 801 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Palacio v. Alaska Seaboard P'rs Ltd. P'ship, 50 So. 3d 54 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)