Federal National Mortgage Association v. Astrid Sanchez, Botanica/Sea Plum Master Association, Inc., Sandpiper Cove at Botanica Condominium Association, Inc., and Carlos Navas
187 So. 3d 341
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Fannie Mae obtained a final judgment of foreclosure after the homeowner defaulted, followed by a foreclosure sale and issuance of a certificate of title.
- After the sale, Fannie Mae discovered the mortgage contained an incorrect legal description that was carried into the judgment, sale advertisement, and certificate of title.
- Fannie Mae moved to vacate the final judgment, judicial sale, and certificate of title so it could correct (reform) the legal description and proceed properly.
- The trial court granted the motion to vacate but then sua sponte dismissed the entire case without prior notice to Fannie Mae or an opportunity to be heard, and gave no reason for dismissal.
- Fannie Mae moved for rehearing, which the trial court summarily denied; Fannie Mae appealed, arguing denial of due process and that dismissal was unnecessary.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sua sponte dismissal without notice violated due process | Dismissal without notice or hearing deprived Fannie Mae of due process | Trial court acted within discretion (no appellee appeared) | Court held dismissal violated due process; reversal and remand |
| Whether a mistaken legal description carried into judgment/deed can be reformed after final judgment and sale | Court should vacate judgment/sale/title and allow Fannie Mae to reform the mortgage and amend the complaint | Final judgment and deed cannot be reformed after sale; parties must be returned to original status (court need not allow amendment) | Court held reformation cannot be done in place of judgment/deed; vacatur of judgment/sale/title is required but dismissal of the entire action is not necessary |
| Whether vacating judgment/sale requires dismissal and refiling of the case | Vacatur of judgment/sale followed by amendment of complaint suffices to return parties to original status and permit foreclosure to proceed correctly | Dismissal required to fully restore parties to original status before starting anew | Court adopted Giesel: dismissal of entire case is unwarranted; plaintiff may amend after vacatur; remand for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Epstein v. Bank of Am., 162 So. 3d 159 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (discusses limits on reforming legal description after judgment and sale)
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Giesel, 155 So. 3d 411 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014) (holds vacatur, not outright dismissal, is the proper remedy so plaintiff can amend complaint)
- Lucas v. Barnett Bank of Lee Cnty., 705 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (explains requirement to return parties to original status and limits on reformation after judgment)