MELVIN L. STEVENS, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, 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.
Stevens appealed the denial of his motions for relief from a foreclosure judgment, contending he was never served with the notice of issue or trial order. The court reversed, finding that the failure to serve Stevens violated his due process rights under Florida's judicial administration rules.
The court held that the failure to serve Stevens with the notice of issue and order setting trial violated Florida's judicial administration rules and his constitutional due process rights, requiring reversal of the final judgment.
[1] A party's due process rights are violated when required notices and orders are not served as directed by the court.
[2] Failure to serve a notice of issue and an order setting trial on a party, after the court has ordered service on that party, requires reversal of a judgment entered again…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“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.”
Establishes the fundamental rule requiring service on all parties and its constitutional underpinning.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNationstar Mortgage filed a foreclosure complaint against Stevens. Stevens was initially represented by counsel but the court authorized his counsel 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 Florida Rule Of Civil Procedure 1.540 cases and more on FLexlaw
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 notiee given must be reasonably calculated, under all circumstances, to apprise *630interested 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.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Guardianship OF Leon Bloom v. Bloom, 227 So. 3d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…dependent clause, a precise point in time to utilize as a reference point is apparent— the attorney’s application for fees—a point that coincides precisely with when notices of hearings are ordinarily required. See Stevens v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, 133 So. 3d 628, 629 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (observing that the requirement that all filed pleadings and papers in court proceedings be served on each party or their counsel “is to satisfy the constitutional requirement of due process”); see also Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2…
-
Kiesha Henderson-Bullard v. Lockard, 204 So. 3d 568 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)…he amended petition. ■ The trial court erred in granting the father’s motion. Generally,' a judgment entered without service on the parties or other notice violates the parties’ due process rights and is void. See Stevens v. Nationstar Mortg., LLC, 133 So. 3d 628, 629 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (“Every pleading and paper filed in any court proceeding must be served on each party or their counsel.... This requirement is to satisfy the constitutional requirement of due process.” (citing Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516)); V…
-
Fain v. Trezzvant Spivey, 324 So. 3d 519 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021)…its provisions to file her list of witnesses and exhibits, and she did not have her witnesses available for trial. She was clearly prejudiced by the lack of notice. 3 This same scenario occurred in Stevens v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC., 133 So. 3d 628 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). In that mortgage foreclosure proceeding, the attorney for the mortgagor withdrew, and the court ordered that the pleadings be served on two designated addresses for the pro se mortgagor. Nevertheless, the trial court’s orde…
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
- Vosilla v. Rosado, 944 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 2006)
- Heritage Casket & Vault IND., Inc. v. Sunshine Bank, 428 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)