Southside Church of Christ of Jacksonville, Inc. v. Walker, trustee for bondholders of Southside Church of Christ of Jacksonville, Inc., 1D17-5142

• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: Kelsey, J.
• Citation: Southside Church of Christ of Jacksonville, Inc. v. Walker, trustee for bondholders of Southside Church of Christ of Jacksonville, Inc., 286 So.3d 951(Mem) (Fla. App. 2019)
• Decision Date: 27 December 2019
• Docket Number: No. 1D17-5142,1D17-5142
• Parties: SOUTHSIDE CHURCH OF CHRIST OF JACKSONVILLE, INC., Appellant, v. Christopher A. WALKER, successor TRUSTEE FOR the BONDHOLDERS OF SOUTHSIDE CHURCH OF CHRIST OF JACKSONVILLE, INC., Appellee.

286 So.3d 951 (Mem)

SOUTHSIDE CHURCH OF CHRIST OF JACKSONVILLE, INC., Appellant,

v.Christopher A. WALKER, successor TRUSTEE FOR the BONDHOLDERS OF SOUTHSIDE CHURCH OF CHRIST OF JACKSONVILLE, INC., Appellee.

No. 1D17-5142

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 27, 2019

William E. Corley, III, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Matthew T. Jackson, Alessandro A. Apolito, and Job W. Fickett, of Brannan, Manna & Diamond, Jacksonville, for Appellee.

Kelsey, J.

The sole argument Appellant raises in this foreclosure appeal is that there was insufficient competent, substantial evidence to support the trial court's conclusion that Appellee had standing to foreclose as successor trustee to the church's bondholders. Appellant argues that the documentary evidence attached to the final judgment was insufficient to establish standing and that alone is reason to reverse. Among those exhibits were ballots accepting Appellee as successor trustee, and his notarized acceptance of that office, which recites that the holders of a majority in principal amount of bonds approved his appointment. Appellant argues the ballots were not witnessed or notarized, the number of ballots was insufficient to support election of a successor trustee, and Appellee's acceptance of office proved nothing.

We reject Appellant's arguments. The trial court conducted an evidentiary hearing below, at which the parties had the opportunity to address these arguments. See Walton v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. , 201 So. 3d 831, 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016) ("Where the documentary evidence is insufficient to prove standing at the time of the filing of the complaint, a witness may provide sufficient testimony to prove standing."). Although this hearing was not transcribed, this Court provided more than ample time for Appellant to supplement the record with a transcript or statement of evidence under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(b)...