Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Michaels
166 So. 3d 226
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Wells Fargo filed a foreclosure action in 2009; defendants Susan and Paul Michaels ultimately filed a consent to foreclosure in September 2013, admitting the complaint and withdrawing affirmative defenses.
- Trial was set for the week of January 27, 2014, with a docket sounding on January 22; trial was later continued (court notes reflected a continuance) but no written or served order resetting the trial was entered.
- Wells Fargo filed a notice of trial for January 29, 2014 and later a notice to set cause on February 4, 2014 seeking a new trial date after the continuance notation.
- The court apparently held a docket sounding on February 19, 2014 and marked its internal trial calendar setting trial for February 27; the calendar and internal notes were unsigned and were not served on the parties.
- No parties appeared on February 27, 2014; the court sua sponte entered an order dismissing the action on March 3, 2014, stating the trial date had been announced at the February 19 docket sounding.
- Wells Fargo moved under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b) to vacate the dismissal for lack of notice; the trial court denied the motion without a hearing and refused further motions, and Wells Fargo appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal is void for lack of notice | Wells Fargo: dismissal void because no written/served order or notice of docket sounding or new trial date was given | Michaels: (implicit) dismissal appropriate because court announced date at docket sounding and dismissal was proper for failure to appear | Court: Dismissal was void for lack of notice; trial court abused discretion by denying Rule 1.540(b) relief and must vacate dismissal |
| Whether trial court must enter/serve written order resetting trial under Rule 1.440 | Wells Fargo: court failed to comply with rule and failed to serve any reset order or notice | Michaels: (implicit) internal calendar/announcements sufficient | Court: Trial court failed to enter or serve required order; must enter and serve an order setting trial under rule 1.440 |
| Whether denial of Rule 1.540(b) relief without hearing was abuse of discretion | Wells Fargo: relief established by record showing no notice; hearing unnecessary but denial without consideration was improper | Michaels: (implicit) no equitable relief warranted | Court: Denial was an abuse of discretion given undisputed lack of notice; relief required |
| Whether procedural defects warrant reversal and reinstatement | Wells Fargo: procedural defects (no notice) require vacatur and reinstatement | Michaels: (implicit) dismissal final and no relief | Court: Reversed and remanded with instructions to vacate dismissal and reinstate case |
Key Cases Cited
- Taylor v. Bowles, 570 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 4th DCA) (holding a trial court abuses its discretion by entering final judgment when a party had no notice of the trial date)
- Shields v. Flinn, 528 So.2d 967 (Fla. 3d DCA) (a judgment entered without notice to a party is void)
- Falkner v. Amerifirst Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 489 So.2d 758 (Fla. 3d DCA) (where uncontroverted facts show no notice, court must grant relief as a matter of law)
- Watson v. Watson, 583 So.2d 410 (Fla. 4th DCA) (trial court abuses discretion in denying motion to set aside judgment when order shows notice was not mailed to correct address)
- Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Lebo, 355 So.2d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA) (standard of review for denial of relief under Rule 1.540(b))