STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS

This appeal is taken from the Circuit Court’s decision to render Summary Final Judgment against the Appellant. The Appellate Court of Florida has jurisdiction to consider the issues raised in this appeal under authority of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 9.130 et seq.

The nature of the case below was Appellee’s Complaint to foreclose the residential real property owned and occupied by the Appellant, Gregory Taylor. (R. I/2) Appellant’s First Amended Answer challenged Appellee’s standing in affirmative defenses and an incorporated Motion to Dismiss. (R. I/111-112, 117, 118-119, 121-124)

On October 9, 2009, a hearing on the Appellee’s Motion for Summary Final Judgment was held. (R. I/166) The Appellee offered in evidence the promissory note, the mortgage instrument and an assignment of mortgage. (R. I/62-87) Appellant’s Response in Opposition to Appellee’s Motion for Summary Final Judgment (which was also identified as a cross-motion for summary judgment) stipulated that this evidence was not in dispute. Appellant contended that the dispute was as to what that evidence actually proved – that being that Appellee was not entitled to enforce the promissory note against Appellant.1 (R. 174-175) This argument in the Appellant’s Response in Opposition to the Motion for Summary Final Judgment was not novel. That document referenced that this argument had been previously raised in the Motion to Dismiss which was incorporated within the First Amended Answer. (R. 175) On October 9, 2009, Judge Silverman granted
Summary Final Judgment of Foreclosure in Appellee’s favor. (R. 166-172)

Read entire brief below..

4closureFraud.org

George Gingo – In the 5th District Florida Court of Appeals