Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Adriano Suazo v. The Bank of New York, 4D14-3897 (2016)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 4D14-3897 Visitors: 5
Filed: Mar. 30, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT ADRIANO SUAZO, Appellant, v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE HOLDERS OF THE GE-WMC ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-1, Appellee. No. 4D14-3897 [March 30, 2016] Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; James Midelis, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. 562008CA005063. David S. Fabrikant of Law Office of David S. Fabrikant, P.A., Stuart, for appellan
More
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT ADRIANO SUAZO, Appellant, v. THE BANK OF NEW YORK, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE HOLDERS OF THE GE-WMC ASSET BACKED PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-1, Appellee. No. 4D14-3897 [March 30, 2016] Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; James Midelis, Senior Judge; L.T. Case No. 562008CA005063. David S. Fabrikant of Law Office of David S. Fabrikant, P.A., Stuart, for appellant. Diana B. Matson and Joshua R. Levine of Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee. PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion to set aside foreclosure judgment. We agree with appellee that the court’s September 9, 2014 order denied the motion to set aside the foreclosure judgment that was filed on November 3, 2009. The September 9, 2014 order denying a “motion to cancel foreclosure sale” contains an obvious scrivener’s error as no motion to cancel sale was pending, nor was a sale even scheduled at the time. The court through its order clearly ruled on the November 3, 2009 motion to set aside judgment, which was the matter that was scheduled for hearing. None of the arguments raised by appellant on appeal have any merit, and we affirm without further discussion. Affirmed. MAY, FORST and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer