OTTAWA PROERTIES 1 LLC
v.
US BANK, NA, ETC.
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.
Service of process that fails to identify the date and time of service on the summons and lacks the process server's signature or initials violates Florida Statutes section 48.031(5) and is subject to quashing.
[1] Service of process must comply with Florida Statutes section 48.031(5), which requires the process server to identify the date and time of service and sign or initial the…
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 intelligenceOttawa Properties 1 LLC, a defendant titleholder in a foreclosure action, moved to quash service of process served by U.S. Bank's process server. The …
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 Confession Of Error cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed August 24, 2022.
________________
No. 3D22-0001 Lower Tribunal No. 13-7027
________________
Ottawa Properties1 LLC,
Appellant,
vs.
US Bank, NA., etc.,
Appellee. An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Vivianne Del Rio, Judge. Wesoloski Carlson, P.A., and Erik D. Wesoloski, for appellant. McGuireWoods LLP, and Sara F. Holladay, Emily Y. Rottmann, and Kathleen D. Kilbride (Jacksonville), for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LOGUE and HENDON, JJ. PER CURIAM.
ON CONFESSION OF ERROR
Ottawa Properties1 LLC, defendant titleholder in a foreclosure action,
appeals a non-final order denying its motion to quash service of process.1
Ottawa moved in the trial court to quash service of process on the basis that
U.S. Bank’s process server failed to identify the date and time of service on
the summons and did not initial or sign the summons, as required by section
48.031(5), Florida Statutes. Based upon U.S. Bank’s commendable
confession of error, and our review of the record, we reverse the denial of
the motion to quash service and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.