YAIMA ORTIZ

v.

NEXBANK

2 Affirmed. See Venezia v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 306 So. 3d 1096, 1097 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“Gross inadequacy of price alone is not enough to set aside a foreclosure sale. . . . [H]e presented no evidence of inadequacy, nor any evidence that the ‘inadequacy of the bid resulted from some mistake, fraud or other irregularity in the sale.’”); IndyMac Fed. Bank FSB v. Hagan, 104 So. 3d 1232, 1236 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“Thus, it is well settled that ‘[i]n order to vacate a foreclosure sale, the trial court must find: (1) that the foreclosure sale bid was grossly or startlingly inadequate; and (2) that the inadequacy of the bid resulted from some mistake, fraud or other irregularity in the sale.’”); Johnson v. State, Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Lamontagne, 973 So. 2d 1236, 1239 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (“A party may forfeit the right to seek relief even from a void judgment if the party's actions or statements have had the effect of ratifying the judgment or conceding its propriety.”); MacDougall v. Kutina, 798 So. 2d 30, 32 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“[T]he court was correct in concluding that the former husband's statement that he had no problem with paying the rehabilitative alimony and requesting additional time to pay, amounted to a submission to the jurisdiction of the court. Such a submission is a waiver of any defects in service of process.”).