Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Janet Stone and Robert Stone

174 So. 3d 550, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 12774, 2015 WL 5027594
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 26, 2015
Docket4D14-2514
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 174 So. 3d 550 (Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Janet Stone and Robert Stone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Janet Stone and Robert Stone, 174 So. 3d 550, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 12774, 2015 WL 5027594 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

On Confession of Error

DAMOORGIAN, J.

Appellant, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“Deutsche”), appeals the trial court’s order involuntarily dismissing its foreclosure action before the close of its case-in-chief. Appellees concede, and we agree, that the trial court reversibly erred in involuntarily dismissing the foreclosure action before Deutsche rested its case. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.420(b) (providing that in bench trials, “[a]fter a party seeking affirmative relief ... has completed the presentation of evidence, any other party may move for a dismissal on the ground that on the facts and the law the party seeking affirmative relief has shown no right to relief .... ”); see also Wachovia Mortg., FSB v. Montes, 156 So.3d 1105, 1106 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (agreeing with other Florida courts that “pursuant to rule 1.420(b), a trial court may not order an involuntary dismissal of a case before a plaintiff rests its case.”).

This error was compounded by the fact that the trial court based its decision to involuntarily dismiss the foreclosure action on its incorrect ruling regarding the admissibility of the notice of default letter. See Haskin v. Haskin, 677 So.2d 376, 377 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) (holding that in considering a motion for involuntary dismissal, a trial court judge may not weigh the evidence). Based on the trial testimony of Deutsche’s witness, the notice of default letter should have been admitted under the business records hearsay exception pursuant to our holding in Bank of New York v. Calloway, 157 So.3d 1064, 1069-72 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). We therefore reverse and remand for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.

TAYLOR and MAY, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Roseman
214 So. 3d 728 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
174 So. 3d 550, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 12774, 2015 WL 5027594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deutsche-bank-national-trust-company-v-janet-stone-and-robert-stone-fladistctapp-2015.