Hazelett v. City of St. Cloud

875 So. 2d 793, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8919, 2004 WL 1413913
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 25, 2004·No. No. 5D03-2645·Published

Opinion

PLEUS, J.

Hazelett appeals the denial of his emergency motion to vacate final judgment and lien sale. He argues that the final judgment and lien sale should have been vacated because his property was protected by homestead. The lower court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the homestead issue. As the property owner, Hazelett had the burden of establishing the homestead character of his property as of the time the lien attached. See Avila South Condominium Ass’n, Inc. v. Kappa Corp., 347 So.2d 599, 605 (Fla.1977). After conflicting evidence was presented, the trial court found that the property was not protected by homestead status. We have reviewed the trial court’s determination and find no error.

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN and PALMER, JJ., concur.

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

Hazelett v. City of St. Cloud, 875 So. 2d 793, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8919, 2004 WL 1413913 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

875 So. 2d 793 (Hazelett v. City of St. Cloud) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.