Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas

Decision Date12 April 2012
Docket NumberNo. 4D11–905.,4D11–905.
PartiesJean W. PHADAEL a/k/a Jean Phadael, Appellant, v. DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS as Trustee for RALI 2007QS9, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Garry W. Johnson and Bruce K. Herman of the 511 Law, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

D. Brian O'Dell, Christian W. Hancock, Ann T. Taylor and Jose D. Vega of Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Birmingham, AL, for appellee.

TAYLOR, J.

Jean Phadael appeals a non-final order denying his rule 1.540(b) motion to vacate a final judgment of foreclosure. We conclude that because Phadael was defaulted and he failed to defend the action at any point before entry of the final judgment, his claim that Deutsche Bank lacked standing at the inception of the suit is not a ground for setting aside the judgment as “void” under rule 1.540(b)(4). We therefore affirm.

On July 29, 2009, Deutsche Bank filed a two-count mortgage foreclosure complaint against Jean Phadael. Count I sought to re-establish a promissory note, alleging that the original note was lost or destroyed, that Deutsche Bank “is the owner of said note,” and that Deutsche Bank was in possession of the note when the loss of possession occurred. Count II sought to foreclose a mortgage on Phadael's real property, alleging that Phadael was in default under the note and mortgage. The copy of the mortgage attached to the complaint stated that the lender was Amnet Mortgage, Inc., and that the mortgagee was MERS.

Phadael did not file an answer or otherwise respond to the complaint, and a default was entered against him. Phadael never moved to set aside the default.

On or about the same day as the summary judgment hearing, Deutsche Bank filed in the circuit court the original note, the original mortgage, and an “Amended Affidavit of Indebtedness.” The original note contained an undated special endorsement in favor of Deutsche Bank. Additionally, the Amended Affidavit of Indebtedness stated that Deutsche Bank was “the designated holder of the mortgage and note,” and that Phadael defaulted under the terms of the note and mortgage.

Following the summary judgment hearing, the trial court entered a final judgment of foreclosure. Subsequently, Phadael, through counsel, filed a motion to vacate the final judgment of foreclosure, arguing primarily that the judgment should be vacated under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(4) because the judgment was “void ab initio” due to Deutsche Bank's lack of standing on the date it filed the complaint. The trial court denied the motion to vacate, prompting this appeal. On appeal, Phadael mainly argues that Deutsche Bank lacked standing to foreclose, specifically at the inception of the lawsuit.

A trial court may relieve a party from a final judgment on the ground that “the judgment or decree is void.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b)(4). An appellate court reviews an order on a rule 1.540(b) motion for relief from judgment under an abuse of discretion standard. See Freemon v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Ams., 46 So.3d 1202, 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).

Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.140(b) provides that every defense in law or fact to a claim for relief in a pleading shall be asserted in the responsive pleading, if one is required. However, the rule identifies seven defenses that a defendant may raise by motion before pleading. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(b). “A motion making any of these defenses shall be made before pleading if a further pleading is permitted.” Id. Furthermore, [a]ny ground not stated shall be deemed to be waived except any ground showing that the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter may be made at any time.” Id. Accordingly, defenses are generally waived if not raised by pre-answer motion or responsive pleading. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(h)(1). Likewise, a default terminates the defending party's right to further defend, except to contest the amount of unliquidated damages. Donohue v. Brightman, 939 So.2d 1162, 1164 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). When a default is entered, the defaulting party admits all well-pled factual allegations of the complaint. Id.

We have previously explained that lack of standing is an affirmative defense that must be raised by the defendant and the failure to raise it generally results in waiver. See Glynn v. First Union Nat'l Bank, 912 So.2d 357, 358 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (holding that a homeowner waived any claim that the bank lacked standing to foreclose where the homeowner never filed a motion or an answer in the trial court); see also Schuster v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Fla., Inc., 843 So.2d 909,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 cases
  • Corrigan v. Bank of Am., N.A.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 5 Febrero 2016
    ...1023 ("[L]ack of standing is an affirmative defense that must be raised by the defendant ...." (quoting Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Ams., 83 So.3d 893, 895 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) )); Jaffer, 155 So.3d at 1202 ("We have repeatedly held that standing is an affirmative defense....").A subs......
  • Jaffer v. Chase Home Fin., LLC
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 7 Enero 2015
    ...an affirmative defense and failure to raise it in a responsive pleading generally results in a waiver. Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas, 83 So.3d 893, 895 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) ; Glynn v. First Union Nat'l Bank, 912 So.2d 357, 358 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) ; Kissman v. Panizzi, 891 So.2d......
  • Detournay v. City of Coral Gables
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 4 Diciembre 2013
    ...where there was no denial or defense raised in defendants' pleadings concerning standing); see also Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas, 83 So.3d 893, 895 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (“We have previously explained that lack of standing is an affirmative defense that must be raised by the de......
  • Winchel v. PennyMac Corp.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 7 Julio 2017
    ...the defendant and the failure to raise it generally results in waiver." (alteration in original) (quoting Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Ams. , 83 So.3d 893, 895 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) )); see also Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.110(d) (requiring that affirmative defenses be pleaded in the answer). Yet o......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Chapter 12-1 Introduction
    • United States
    • Full Court Press Florida Foreclosure Law 2020 Title Chapter 12 Motions for Summary Judgment in Foreclosure Cases
    • Invalid date
    ...on the date the complaint is filed) as an affirmative defense in foreclosure lawsuits (see Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Ams, 83 So. 3d 893, 895 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) ("[L]ack of standing is an affirmative defense that must be raised by the defendant and the failure to raise it generally r......
  • Protecting your injunction on appeal in trial court.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 88 No. 1, January - January 2014
    • 1 Enero 2014
    ...v. Meeks, 582 So. 2d 95, 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Int'l Jai-Alai, 563 So. 2d at 1117. (37) Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas, 83 So. 3d 893, 895 (Fla. 4th DCA (38) Liberty Counsel v. Florida Bar Bd. of Governors, 12 So. 3d 183, n.7 (Fla. 2009). (39) Edwards v. Harris, 964 So. 2d 19......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT