Legal Opinion · Dissent

De La Osa v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 14, 2016No. 3D14-1455Published

1DissentScales, J.

I respectfully dissent. The language of rule 1.540(b)(4) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure is clear and unambiguous. In the absence of ambiguity or of other doubt as to meaning, I would not apply this Court’s interpretive power of statutory construction to create a new definition for the term “judgment or decree” in rule 1.540(b)(4). I concur, however, in the en banc majority’s referral of this matter to the Florida Bar’s Civil Procedure Rules Committee.

I. Facts

It is telling that the majority opinion scuttles over the facts as if they were hot coals. See majority opinion at 1. The facts…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. King v. BurwellSupreme Court of the United States · 2015
  2. Caufield v. CanteleSupreme Court of Florida · 2002
  3. Wollard v. Lloyd's & Companies of Lloyd'sSupreme Court of Florida · 1983
  4. Falkner v. AMERIFIRST FEDERAL SAV. AND LOANDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
  5. Pino v. Bank of New YorkSupreme Court of Florida · 2013

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API