WILMINGTON TRUST, N.A., ETC., APPELLANT,
v.
CARLTON A. WHYTE ETC., 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.
Wilmington Trust, as trustee, appealed the trial court's denial of its motion to vacate a dismissal of a foreclosure action against the Whytes. The court reversed, finding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion to vacate based on excusable neglect, where the trustee's counsel failed to receive trial notice due to a computer system error.
The trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion to vacate. Excusable neglect was established because the trustee's counsel did not receive the trial notice due to a problem with its computer system, and courts have consistently held that such errors constitute excusable neglect under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(1).
[1] A trial court abuses its discretion by denying a motion to vacate a dismissal when the dismissal resulted from excusable neglect.
[2] Excusable neglect can be found where inaction results from clerical error, a system malfunction, or other human error.
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“excusable neglect is found where inaction results from clerical or secretarial error, [ ] a system gone awry or any other of the foibles to which human error is heir.”
Establishes the legal standard for excusable neglect under Florida law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilmington Trust filed a foreclosure action against Carlton A. Whyte and Diana Whyte in 2013. Trial was initially delayed due to the defendants' bankr…
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 Motion To Vacate Dismissal cases and more on FLexlaw
Wilmington Trust, N.A., as Trustee, for the Benefit of Registered Holders of Structured Asset Mortgage Investments II Trust 2007-AR1, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-AR1 (“Trustee”) appeals the denial of its Motion to Vacate Order Dismissing Case. We reverse.
Trustee filed a foreclosure action against Appellees Carlton A. Whyte and Diana Whyte1 in 2013. The matter was set for trial in February 2015, but trial was delayed because Appellees filed a Suggestion of Bankruptcy. After the bankruptcy was dismissed the Trustee re-noticed the matter for trial. The trial court entered an Order re-setting the matter, but due to an electronic filing error within the Trustee’s counsel’s computer system, counsel did not receive the notice. When the Trustee’s counsel did not appear at the time of trial, the trial court dismissed the foreclosure action. Upon later learning of the dismissal, the Trustee moved to vacate the dismissal arguing excusable neglect. After hearing, the trial court denied the motion.
We believe the trial court abused its discretion in doing so. As has been explained in many cases, “[ejxcusable neglect is found where inaction results from clerical or secretarial error, [ ] a system gone awry or any other of the foibles to which human error is heir.” Elliott v. Aurora *495 Loan Servs., LLC, 31 So.3d 304, 307 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). See also, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC v. Brogdon, 185 So.3d 627, 629 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) and Edwards v. Najjar, 748 So.2d 1101, 1103 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). In this case, the Trustee provided undisputed evidence that, due to a problem with its counsel’s computer system, counsel did not actually receive the notice for trial. Courts have consistently held that such error constitutes excusable neglect under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(1) and the trial court abused its discretion in not finding that excusable neglect was shown in this case. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order dismissing the case and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Elliott v. Aurora Loan Servs., LLC, 31 So. 3d 304 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- Edwards v. Elisha Najjar and Ruth Najjar, 748 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Purse v. State, 185 So. 3d 627 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)
- Addison v. City OF Tampa, 31 So. 3d 304 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC v. Timber Courtney Brogdon, 185 So. 3d 627 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)