From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mondestin v. Duval Fed. Sav. Loan

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jan 28, 1987
500 So. 2d 580 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Summary

holding that a party against whom a motion for summary judgment is filed is entitled to notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard

Summary of this case from Florida Bar v. Rapoport

Opinion

No. 4-86-0213.

December 10, 1986. Rehearing Denied January 28, 1987.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Broward County, Paul Marko, III, J.

Alec Ross of Alec Ross Law Offices, North Miami Beach, for appellants.

Nancy K. Neidich of Wiener, Shapiro Rose, Miami, for appellee.


Appellants seek reversal of a summary final judgment in a mortgage foreclosure case. It is undisputed that appellants were unrepresented at the summary judgment hearing. Counsel for appellants asserts that he was not present at the hearing because he did not receive notice, and that he would have been present had he known of the hearing. There is nothing in the record sufficient to establish that notice was received.

Because of the due process implications inherent in appellants' position, this Court finds that it has no alternative but to reverse the summary final judgment and to remand for a new hearing on the motion, to be held after legally sufficient service of notice of the time and place of the hearing on appellants. However, the Court does not intend, by doing so, to express any opinion regarding the merit of either the motion for summary judgment or appellants' arguments in opposition. We hold only that appellants are entitled to notice and an opportunity to appear and present their position.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

LETTS and WALDEN, JJ., and WEBSTER, PETER D., Associate Judge, concur.


Summaries of

Mondestin v. Duval Fed. Sav. Loan

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jan 28, 1987
500 So. 2d 580 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

holding that a party against whom a motion for summary judgment is filed is entitled to notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard

Summary of this case from Florida Bar v. Rapoport

holding that a party against whom a motion for summary judgment is filed is entitled to notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard

Summary of this case from Greene v. Seigle

In Mondestin v. Duval Federal Savings and Loan Ass'n, 500 So.2d 580 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), this court under similar circumstances reversed a summary final judgment and remanded for a new hearing on the motion to be held after legally sufficient service of notice of the time and place of the hearing on appellants.

Summary of this case from Berchtold v. Griffin
Case details for

Mondestin v. Duval Fed. Sav. Loan

Case Details

Full title:MAX MONDESTIN AND HELENA MONDESTIN, APPELLANTS, v. DUVAL FEDERAL SAVINGS…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jan 28, 1987

Citations

500 So. 2d 580 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

Citing Cases

Pile v. Geltex Trading Corp.

The defendant was not present at the hearing on the summary judgment motion. We reverse, first, because the…

Kozich v. Hartford Ins. Co.

Judge Vitale's form order does not comply with rule 1.510(c) and we disapprove of its use. An order granting…