Share on Facebook
Share on X
Share on LinkedIn
By Ernest Ricci
Shareholder

In Gray v. Fifth Third Bank, 50 Fla. L. Weekly D1764 (Fla. 6th DCA 2025), the Sixth District Court of Appeal reversed a default judgment — not because of a novel legal argument, but because of a foundational procedural failure: the defendant was never properly served.

Fifth Third Bank had obtained a default judgment in a foreclosure action. The defendant later moved to vacate, arguing he had never been served. On appeal, the bank eventually conceded the service was defective, and the court reversed.

The ruling underscores a basic but easily overlooked practice point: always confirm the sufficiency of service. This applies equally to plaintiffs trying to secure a quick judgment and to defense counsel evaluating the viability of motions to vacate. Improper service renders everything downstream — including a default — voidable.

Attorneys often rely on paralegals or process servers to handle service; however, courts expect the attorney of record to review the return of service, verify that it complies with statutory requirements, and confirm that the named defendant was actually served at the correct address by an authorized person.

Takeaway: Don’t shortcut service. Whether you’re seeking judgment or defending one, start every case by reviewing the return of service. If service is defective, everything that follows is at risk.

At Boatman Ricci, we bring disciplined procedural scrutiny to every case — because getting the fundamentals wrong can undo a strong position. Need help evaluating service or pursuing a motion to vacate? Contact our team for experienced guidance.

* * * * * * * * * *

THIS BLOG IS INTENDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE. THE READER SHOULD CONSULT WITH KNOWLEDGEABLE LEGAL COUNSEL TO DETERMINE HOW APPLICABLE LAWS APPLY TO SPECIFIC FACTS AND SITUATIONS. BLOG POSTS ARE BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT INFORMATION AT THE TIME THEY ARE WRITTEN. SINCE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE LAWS OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES MAY HAVE CHANGED SINCE PUBLICATION, PLEASE CALL US TO DISCUSS ANY ACTION YOU MAY BE CONSIDERING AS A RESULT OF READING THIS BLOG.

About the Author
Ernest A. Ricci, a shareholder with the Firm, is an AV-Preeminent Rated attorney by Martindale-Hubbell, the highest rating an attorney can receive for their professional ethics and legal ability by their peers and the judiciary. Ernest represents businesses and individuals in a variety of litigation related matters, which include business litigation, construction defect and lien litigation, real estate litigation, general contract litigation, and trust and estate litigation. Ernest also serves as general counsel for various Homeowners Associations and Condo Associations throughout Southwest Florida.