Evelyn Martinez v. Selene Finance LP

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: July 10, 2024
• Docket: 2022-1623
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed July 10, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-1623 Lower Tribunal No. 14-31340 ________________

Evelyn Martinez, et al., Appellants,

vs.

Selene Finance LP, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose M. Rodriguez, Judge.

Pomeranz & Associates, P.A., and Mark L. Pomeranz (Hallandale), for appellants.

Robertson, Anschutz, Schneid, Crane & Partners, PLLC and David Rosenberg (Boca Raton), for appellee.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and LINDSEY and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See § 673.3081(1), Fla. Stat. (2022); Bennett v. Deutsche Bank Nat. Tr. Co., 124 So. 3d 320, 323 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (holding that

plaintiff bank was entitled to rely on presumption that signature on

indorsements was authentic as provided in section 673.3081(1) in absence

of evidentiary showing by defendants to support their claim that signature

was unauthorized); accord Selim v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2023 WL

5731201, *1, 48 Fla. L. Weekly D1790 (Fla. 3d DCA Sept. 6, 2023); Barsan

v. Trinity Fin. Servs., LLC, 258 So. 3d 516 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018); see also G &

G In-Between Bridge Club Corp. v. Palm Plaza Assoc., 356 So. 3d 292, 299

(Fla. 2d DCA 2023) (explaining that under Florida’s “new” summary

judgment standard, when plaintiff moves for summary judgment on its

claims, defendant bears initial burden of showing affirmative defense applies

because defendant bears burden of proof on affirmative defense at trial);

Chowdhury v. BankUnited, N.A., 366 So. 3d 1130, 1133 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA

2023) (holding that under “new” summary judgment standard defendant bore

burden of showing affirmative defense applied and precluded summary

judgment (citing id. at 299–300)).