Roth v. CitiMortgage, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Roth v. CitiMortgage, Inc.

115 So. 3d 1048, 2013 WL 2420331, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8846

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 5, 2013

DocketNo. 4D13-944

StatusPublished

This text of 115 So. 3d 1048 (Roth v. CitiMortgage, Inc.) 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

Roth v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 115 So. 3d 1048, 2013 WL 2420331, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8846 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Alan Roth, appeals the trial court’s order denying Mr. Roth’s motion to quash service. Appellee, CitiMortgage, Inc., filed a foreclosure complaint against Alan Roth, Candace Roth, and others on October 9, 2012. Alan Roth was served by substitute service on his wife, Candace. Mr. Roth filed a motion to quash service of process on February 19, 2013, attaching two affidavits, his own and his wife’s. Both affidavits state that Mr. Roth vacated the marital home (where he was served by substitute service) on or about March 1, 2012. Appellee concedes that the denial of Mr. Roth’s motion to quash service was error.

Accordingly, appellee requests this Court to accept this confession of error and remand with directions to the trial court for it to: (1) vacate its order denying Mr. Roth’s motion to quash service of process; (2) enter an order granting Mr. Roth’s motion to quash service of process; and (3) conduct further proceedings. We accept the appellee’s confession of error. We reverse and remand this cause to the trial court for further proceedings consistent herewith.

MAY, C.J., TAYLOR and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Alan Roth, appeals the trial court’s order denying Mr. Roth’s motion to quash service. Appellee, CitiMortgage, Inc., filed a foreclosure complaint against Alan Roth, Candace Roth, and others on October 9, 2012. Alan Roth was served by substitute service on his wife, Candace. Mr. Roth filed a motion to quash service of process on February 19, 2013, attaching two affidavits, his own and his wife’s. Both affidavits state that Mr. Roth vacated the marital home (where he was served by substitute service) on or about March 1, 2012. Appellee concedes that the denial of Mr. Roth’s motion to quash service was error.

Accordingly, appellee requests this Court to accept this confession of error and remand with directions to the trial court for it to: (1) vacate its order denying Mr. Roth’s motion to quash service of process; (2) enter an order granting Mr. Roth’s motion to quash service of process; and (3) conduct further proceedings. We accept the appellee’s confession of error. We reverse and remand this cause to the trial court for further proceedings consistent herewith.

MAY, C.J., TAYLOR and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 So. 3d 1048, 2013 WL 2420331, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8846, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roth-v-citimortgage-inc-fladistctapp-2013.