X hits on this document

PDF document

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA - page 12 / 26

67 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

12 / 26

ARGUMENT

I.

THIS COURT LACKS JURISDICTION OVER THIS CASE SINCE THERE IS NO CONFLICT IN THE COURTS CONCERNING THE APPROPRIATE METHOD OF SERVICE OF PROCESS ON PRISONERS.

Shurman contends that this Court has jurisdiction because

the opinion below conflicts with two decisions of this Court,

other opinions from the Fifth District, and opinions from the

Fourth

District

Court

of

Appeals.

Br.

at

11.

The

cases

he

cites, however, are factually distinguishable and simply do not

address

the

precise

legal

issue

involved

here.

As

such,

they

provide no conflict jurisdiction.

The facts of this case are straightforward.

Shurman argues

that the trial court erred in refusing to set aside the

foreclosure judgment due to invalid service of process upon him.

Section 48.031, Florida Statutes, sets forth the requirements:

Service

of

original

process

is

made

by

delivering served ...

her

usual

a copy of it to

or by place

leaving the

of

abode

the person

copies at

with

any

to be his or person

residing therein who older and informing contents.

is 15 years of age or the person of their

§ 48.031(1)(a), Florida Statute

s (1998).

Atlantic served Shurman

by delivering a copy of the process to his wife at the home they

twelve

years

9;

A.1,

p.1;

shared

for

52;

R2:7,

before

Shurman

was

A.2,

p.6,

13.

When

incarcerated.

doing

so,

the

R1:151-

process

server explained the contents of the documents to Shurman's wife.

5

Document info
Document views67
Page views67
Page last viewedWed Dec 07 23:07:20 UTC 2016
Pages26
Paragraphs1566
Words5006

Comments