Martins v. Oaks Master Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc.
Decision Date | 14 November 2014 |
Docket Number | No. 5D13–3852.,5D13–3852. |
Citation | 159 So.3d 142 |
Parties | Sergio MARTINS, Appellant, v. The OAKS MASTER PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bradford Petrino, of Korshak & Associates, P.A., Casselberry, for Appellant.
Marisa R. Cochrane, of Larsen & Associates, P.L., Orlando, for Appellee.
Sergio Martins appeals a summary final judgment foreclosing a claim of lien related to an Osceola County property entered in favor of The Oaks Master Property Owners Association, Inc., (HOA), and an order denying his motion to vacate final judgment, void sale of real property, vacate default, and quash service of process. Martins argues that the final judgment is void because the HOA's constructive service on him was defective. We agree, and reverse.
In February 2010, the HOA filed a foreclosure complaint to enforce and foreclose a claim of lien in regard to Martins' failure to pay maintenance assessments. A letter enclosing the claim of lien was addressed to Martins and mailed to the subject property. A service processor attempted to serve Martins at the subject property, but found that the house was unfurnished and the power was off. A neighbor reported that the owner is there now and then. Thereafter, the HOA's counsel filed an affidavit for service by publication, alleging:
Notice was published in the Heritage Florida Jewish News in the issues of March 18 and 25, 2011. Subsequently, the clerk granted the HOA's motion for default, and a summary final judgment followed, directing that the property be sold at public auction to satisfy the HOA's claim of lien. The property was then sold at public auction to an uninterested third party.
Although Martins owned the Osceola County property, he has resided in Cutler Bay, Florida since 2005. He purchased the property for his grandmother who moved out in 2006, and relocated to Georgia with her sister, Martins' aunt. Since that time, his aunt checked on the property every other month, and had enlisted the help of a neighbor with yard work.
Martins' aunt notified Martins of the foreclosure after the neighbor notified her that the locks had been changed and furniture had been removed. Accordingly, Martins filed a motion to vacate final judgment, void sale of real property, vacate default, and quash service of process. Martins insisted that the HOA's diligent search was insufficient because it did not search any public records other than Osceola County, did not search any voter registration records, did not search the Osceola County Tax Collector's records, did not search the Florida Department of Motor Vehicles records regarding title, registration, or driver's licenses, and did not talk to any of Martins' neighbors or utility companies providing service to the property. If the HOA had done so, it would have discovered that Martins' driver's license listed the Cutler Bay address as his address, Martins had several vehicles registered to his Cutler Bay address, and the Osceola County Tax Collector's records for the subject property listed the Cutler Bay address as Martins' address. Martins further alleged that the HOA failed to examine its own business records to find that it had previously mailed correspondence to Martins at his Cutler Bay address. Indeed, in 2009 the HOA mailed a work order invoice for the subject property to Martins at the Cutler Bay address. In May 2010, the HOA's counsel mailed Martins a letter to his Cutler Bay address informing him that it was attempting to collect a debt, and that if he was the owner of the subject property, to please contact the law firm. Martins denied that he ever received the letter. Even so, the HOA never attempted to serve Martins at the Cutler Bay address.
We review the denial of a motion to vacate a final judgment for a gross abuse of discretion. Lewis v. Fifth Third Mortg. Co., 38 So.3d 157, 160 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010). “A fundamental requirement of due process in any judicial proceeding is notice reasonably calculated both to apprise interested parties of the pendency of the action, and to give the party so notified an opportunity to present his or her side of the controversy.” Miller v. Partin, 31 So.3d 224, 227 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010). “Due process considerations do take into account the need to serve a party by publication when the circumstances authorize it, but notice by publication is generally regarded as insufficient with respect to an individual whose name and address are known or easily ascertainable.” Id.
Pursuant to sections 49.011(1) and 49.021(1), Florida Statutes (2010), service of process by publication may be made on any known or unknown party, upon which personal service cannot be effected, in an action or proceeding to enforce any legal or equitable lien or claim to any title or interest in real or personal property.See First Home View Corp. v. Guggino, 10 So.3d 164, 165 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). “[B]ecause the lack of personal service implicates due process concerns, a plaintiff must strictly comply with the statutory requirements.” See Redfield Invs., A.V.V. v. Village of Pinecrest, 990 So.2d 1135, 1138 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). “Failure to strictly comply renders a subsequent judgment voidable.” Floyd v. Fed. Nat'l Mortg. Ass'n, 704 So.2d 1110, 1112 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). “If service of process is so defective that it amounts to no notice of the proceedings, the judgment is void.” Id. For example, in Godsell v. United...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Benavente v. Ocean Vill. Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc., 4D18-1819
...; accord § 49.011, Fla. Stat. (2017) ; § 49.021, Fla. Stat. (2017) ; § 49.041, Fla. Stat. (2017) ; Martins v. Oaks Master Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc. , 159 So.3d 142, 145-46 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) ; First Home View Corp. v. Guggino , 10 So.3d 164, 165 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)."If the trial judge were t......
-
Santiago v. Wilmington Trust, Nat'l Ass'n
...must strictly comply with the statutory requirements [before serving process by publication]." Martins v. Oaks Master Prop. Owners Ass'n , 159 So. 3d 142, 146 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (quoting Redfield Invs., A.V.V. v. Vill. of Pinecrest , 990 So. 2d 1135, 1138 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) ). The statutor......
-
Santiago v. Wilmington Tr.
...to section 49.041 is legally sufficient and (2) if the plaintiff actually conducted an adequate search to locate the defendant. Martins, 159 So.3d at 146 (quoting First View Corp. v. Guggino, 10 So.3d 164, 165 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)). In deciding if a diligent search and inquiry to locate a def......
-
Burgos v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A.
...LLC, 16 So. 3d 1009 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) ; Howard v. Gualt, 259 So. 3d 119, 121 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) ; Martins v. Oaks Master Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc., 159 So. 3d 142, 146 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). ...