X hits on this document

PDF document

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA - page 10 / 26

62 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

10 / 26

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

This Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter because the

Fifth District's opinion does not directly and expressly conflict

with any Florida Supreme Court or district court case.

Even if the Court retains jurisdiction, it should affirm the

decision below because the Fifth District correctly upheld the

trial court's denial of Shurman's motion to set aside the final

judgment

of

foreclosure.

Atlantic

obtained

valid

service

of

process on Shurman under Florida law by serving substitute

process on his wife at the home they shared before Shurman was

incarcerated and in which his family continued to reside after

his

incarceration.

An

imprisoned

party's

"usual

place

of

abode"

under § 48.031, Florida Statutes, is where the party resided

prior to incarceration if the party's family continues to reside

there when process is served.

Finally, any decision that Shurman's service was invalid

despite Atlantic's compliance with § 48.031(1)(a), Florida

Statutes, would be a departure from existing law effectively

creating an exception to the service of process statute for

prisoners.

As

a

result,

Atlantic

should

not

be

bound

by

a

new

construction of the statute of which it had no notice at the time

service

was

perfected.

Instead,

the

Fifth

District

Court

of

Appeals' decision should be affirmed and the ruling be given only

prospective force.

3

Document info
Document views62
Page views62
Page last viewedTue Dec 06 10:31:14 UTC 2016
Pages26
Paragraphs1566
Words5006

Comments