217 So. 3d 1173
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2017Background
- Larry and Laurie Dobson appealed a final judgment of foreclosure entered for U.S. Bank National Association.
- At trial, the Bank presented witnesses and rested after the Dobsons cross-examined them.
- After the Bank rested, the Dobsons moved for involuntary dismissal based partly on the bank's alleged failure to comply with paragraph 22 of the mortgage.
- The trial court denied the dismissal motion, announced it was entering final judgment for the Bank, and asked the Bank to submit a proposed final judgment.
- Immediately after announcing judgment, the court refused to admit a document the Dobsons’ counsel attempted to offer, refused to allow closing argument, and concluded the hearing.
- The Dobsons argued the court’s refusal to let them present evidence and argument violated their due process rights.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court violated due process by cutting off the Dobsons' opportunity to present evidence and argument | Dobsons: court denied their right to be heard, prevented admission of evidence and closing argument | Bank: trial court acted within discretion in concluding case and entering judgment | Court: Reversed — trial court violated due process by denying opportunity to present evidence and closing argument; remanded for new trial |
Key Cases Cited
- VMD Fin. Servs., Inc. v. CB Loan Purchase Assocs., 68 So. 3d 997 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (standards for reviewing due-process rulings de novo)
- Dep’t of Rev. ex rel. Poynter v. Bunnell, 51 So. 3d 543 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (due-process review principles)
- Vollmer v. Key Dev. Props., Inc., 966 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (right to introduce evidence at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner)
- Baron v. Baron, 941 So. 2d 1233 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (explication of the right to introduce evidence)
- Pettry v. Pettry, 706 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (denial of opportunity to testify and call witnesses is fundamental error)
- Beltran v. Kalb, 982 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (summary denial of motions without reasonable opportunity to be heard violates due process)
- Fuentes v. Shevin, 407 U.S. 67 (U.S. 1972) (due-process protections for property and procedural fairness)
- Edelman v. Breed, 836 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (directed verdict before party presents case denies due process)
- Vazquez v. Vazquez, 626 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993) (due-process right to be heard and present witnesses)
- Strong v. Mt. Dora Growers Coop., 495 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) (same)