Arsali v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., 82 So. 3d 833

Deutsche Bank filed a foreclosure action in Palm Beach County; final judgment entered for $350,419.21 on April 30, 2010; foreclosure sale scheduled for June 10, 2010.
Appellant, a third-party purchaser, submitted the highest bid of $16,100 at the June 10 sale and obtained a certificate of sale.
Bank emergency-moved to rescind and reschedule the sale, claiming it failed to attend due to a mistaken belief the sale would be cancelled and that bid was grossly undervalued (appraised at $185,940).
Bank alleged bid was 11.55% of appraised value, asserting mistake/inadvertence and irregularity in the sale; homeowner objected to the sale.
Trial court granted the rescission motion on June 17, 2010 without notice to appellant.
Appellant filed a motion for rehearing on June 25, 2010; trial court denied on August 18, 2010, concluding the June 10 sale should have been canceled.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Standing to appeal as a nonparty	Appellant is a quasi-party with appellate standing and need not intervene.	Appellant lacks standing absent Rule 1.230 intervention order.	Appellant has standing as a quasi-party; intervention not required.
Authority to grant rescission without notice or hearing	Bank may rescind based on alleged mistake and undervalued bid without notice or evidence.	Emergency motion to rescind can be granted without a full evidentiary hearing.	Error to grant without notice and evidentiary hearing; due process requires hearing.
Procedural sufficiency of bank's evidence to vacate sale	Bank's motion established inadequacy and irregularity; affidavits/hearing unnecessary.	Bank's motion relied on unsworn statements; no sworn affidavits or testimony presented.	Insufficient record to vacate; evidentiary hearing required.
Two-part test for setting aside a foreclosure sale	Burden only to show grossly inadequate bid and related irregularity.	Two-part test governs; must prove both inadequacy and resulting irregularity/mistake.	Two-part test applies; appellant met burden on record and remand appropriate.

Miller v. Stavros, 174 So.2d 48 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965) (third-party purchaser is a quasi-party with appeal rights without intervening)
Confederate Point P’ship, Ltd. v. Schatten, 278 So.2d 661 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973) (purchasers at judicial sale are privies to the judgment and may appeal)
Cueto v. Mfrs. & Traders Trust Co., 791 So.2d 1125 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (gives context on adequacy of bid and relate drules)
Blue Star Invs., Inc. v. Johnson, 801 So.2d 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (two-part standard for setting aside foreclosure sales)
Esque Real Estate Holdings, Inc. v. C.H. Consulting, Ltd., 940 So.2d 1185 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (evidentiary hearing may be required when irregularities are alleged)
U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n. v. Bjeljac, 43 So.3d 851 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (due process requires a hearing on bank’s request to set aside a sale)
Ingorvaia v. Horton, 816 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (abuse of discretion standard for setting aside foreclosure sales)
United Cos. Lending Corp. v. Abercrombie, 713 So.2d 1017 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (equitable power to set aside sale for notice defects and other egregious issues)
Cicoria v. Gazi, 901 So.2d 282 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (notice defects and other irregularities permit equitable relief)