Risch v. Bank of America, National Ass'n Ex Rel. Lasalle Bank, N.A.

72 So. 3d 161, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12147, 2011 WL 3303483
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 3, 2011·No. 2D10-4882·Published

Opinion

BLACK, Judge.

Janice M. Risch appeals the trial court’s denial of her emergency motion for rehearing or, in the alternative, for relief from judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540. The record shows that the trial court conducted a hearing on Ms. Risch’s motion; however, there was no evidence presented. Since Ms. Risch’s motion asserted allegations of misrepresentation, which might give rise to relief pursuant to rule 1.540(b)(3), and since she attached an affidavit and records which could support her claim, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing. See S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Welden, 483 So.2d 487, 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (“[Wjhere the moving party’s allegations raise a colorable entitlement to rule 1.540(b)(3) relief, a formal evidentiary hearing on the motion, as well as permissible discovery prior to the hearing, is required.”); see also Rosenthal v. Ford, 443 So.2d 1077, 1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (“The credibility of appellant’s allegations should only be determined by the trial court after an evidentiary hearing thereon.”).

Reversed and remanded.

SILBERMAN, C.J., and DAVIS, J., Concur.

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

Risch v. Bank of America, National Ass'n Ex Rel. Lasalle Bank, N.A., 72 So. 3d 161, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12147, 2011 WL 3303483 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

72 So. 3d 161 (Risch v. Bank of America, National Ass'n Ex Rel. Lasalle Bank, N.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. v. Welden
483 So. 2d 487 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Rosenthal v. Ford
443 So. 2d 1077 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)