Tag: florida civil litigation

Posted on

Default Judgment Not Permitted for Complaint that Fails to State Cause of Action

Florida Motion to Set Aside Default Final Judgment

Florida Motion to Set Aside Default Final Judgment

 

In Mauna Loa Investments v. Anamaria Santiago, 38 Fla. L. Weekly D658a (Fla 3DCA 2013), the Florida Third District Court of Appeal held that a default judgment should not be entered against a party when the Complaint itself failed to state a cause of action.  This Florida personal injury case involved a slip and fall injury by a pedestrian on a walkway surface. The Defendant and alleged owner of the property failed to file a timely response to the Complaint.  As a result, the trial court entered a default final judgment against the defendant. 

Motion to Set Aside Default Final Judgment

Upon learning of the default final judgment, the defendant requested that the final judgment be set aside on the grounds that it was not the proper party since it did not own the property on the date of the injury.  Pursuant to Florida law, a party may seek to have an order or judgment set aside on the basis of mistake, surprise, excusable neglect, misrepresentation, fraud or the fact that the order or judgment is void as a matter of law.  In this instance, the Defendant relied upon a special warranty deed to show the Court that the property was transferred to it three months after the date of the injury.  Notwithstanding the deed, the trial court denied the motion to set aside the default final judgment.

Default is Void Where Complaint Fails to State Cause of Action

In reversing the trial court, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal relied upon the well settled proposition that a default final judgment may not be entered against a defendant on a complaint that wholly fails to state a cause of action.  Applied to this case, the deed established that the defendant did not own the property at the time of the entry and therefore the complaint could not state a cause of action against the defendant.  Accordingly, since the complaint failed to state a cause of action, both the default and default final judgment were void.

Lessons Learned

In civil litigation cases, it is essential for the claimant to not only name the proper parties but to state all the required elements for a valid cause of action.  In doing so, the Florida litigant and plaintiff must research and prove the connection of the named defendant to the case and thereafter state simple facts to link the defendant to the claim being made against it.  Failing to do this could mean that you lose your case even when unopposed.

Related Topics: Florida civil litigation, Florida personal injury, Florida default final judgment, Florida Motion to Set Aside Default Final Judgment, Florida Motion to Set Aside Order

Posted on

Private Mailbox Service of Process

Florida Service of Process

Florida Service of Process

 

 

The Florida Second District Court of Appeal in McDaniel v. Firstbank Puerto Rico, 37 Fla. L. Weekly D1621a (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), recently considered whether substitute service of process of a complaint on a Defendant’s private mailbox (PO Box) was proper when the public records disclosed that the Defendant had a registered homestead address in Florida and no attempt was made to serve the complaint at that address.

Due Process and Florida Service of Process

In this particular case, the Plaintiff served the complaint by serving an employee of the company that rented a private mailbox to the Defendant.  The Defendant was not personally served with the complaint nor was there an attempt to serve the Defendant at his listed residential address in Florida.  Florida Statute 48.031 (6) allows the service of a complaint on a party by leaving a copy of the complaint with the person in charge of a private mailbox if that is the only address discoverable through public records.  The intent of this statute is not to permit a person to hide behind a post office box to avoid service of process.

The Defendant learned of the service of process at the post office box and moved to quash the same as being improper since the Plaintiff made no attempt to serve the complaint at the residential address.  The trial court denied the motion to quash.  The Plaintiff argued that service of process was still proper because the Defendant appeared in the case and thus waived an objection to personal jurisdiction and that any error in the service of process was harmless since the Defendant had actual knowledge of the law suit.

No Waiver of Defects in Service of Process

The Second District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s denial of the motion to quash the service of process.  The appellate court determined that the service of process statute must be strictly complied with and any deviation from the same is ineffective service of process.  Florida law provides that actual knowledge of a law suit does not cure defective service of process and the mere act of challenging that defective service of process does not submit one to the Court’s jurisdiction.

Related Topics: Florida Civil Litigation, Florida Service of Process, Florida Substitute Service 

 

Posted on

Separate Claims Cannot Be Added For Jurisictional Purposes

In Bowers v. Parrish, 1D01-3810 (Fla. 1DCA 2003), opinion filed May 6, 2003, the Florida First District Court of Appeal held that separate and distinct claims, even if against the same party, cannot be aggregated in order to meet the jurisdictional monetary threshold of the circuit court.  Rather than dismissal, the action should be transferred to the County Court.

css.php