P & A COLLECTIONS

v.

PIETER PIERR VAN DER VLIET

a e County, Florida, Lourdes Simon, Judge. JEREMY KOSS, ESQ., for Appellant. PIETER PIERRE VAN DER VLIENT, PRO SE., for Appell ‘~51 @‘r}r<: In/» - Before SP ' ENC]-FR EIG, CHARLES FD?-II\1SON, and é ISTINA MIRANDA, JJ. (JOHNSON, J.) The Appellee, in the hearing below moved to , vacate ajudgment against him that was entered after he failed to appear for atrial for which he was properly noticed. vacated thejudgment ft ' a er a hearing. The Appellee argued that his failure to The trial court appear was caused HZ V _ ,_.....- .1 .-..,- TI‘. 5» ERRE VAN DER VLIET, I, ‘.13 Appellee. ¢,.»_,, muzttl 2/» % .,....- smlt °**1:::S °EZ‘.'I,‘.2n <:::» [*2] by reasons that constituted excusable neglect. At the hearing on the motion to vacate, the Appellee offered sort of an amorphous, unsubstantiated conclusion that he could possibly face a seizure within a year of surgery. (The trial below was set approximately six months after surgery.) While we have no knowledge ofwhether this is medically verifiable, the point is merely that the Appellee offered nothing to support this supposition that could meet the legal standard for excusable neglect. His motion was unswom, and in fact alleged no such medical concerns, but rather restated many ofhis defenses. His testimony at the hearing was unsworn and conclusory. “I have normal recovery prescribed of one year.” (A. 309). “I was at risk of a grand mal seizure.” (A.320). No competent medical evidence was adduced by the Defendant below at the hearing. An affidavit from a doctor would certainly have sufficed, but the Defendant neglected to obtain any support whatsoever for his contention. The Third District Court ofAppeal directly addressed such a circumstance in B. C. Builders Supply C0., Inc. v. Maldonado, 405 So. 2d 1345 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). The requirement that the defendant demonstrate excusable neglect requires more than a conclusionary statement. A party moving to vacate a default must set forth facts explaining or justifying the mistake or inadvertence by affidavit or other sworn statement... B.C. Builders, 405 So. 2d at 1348. See also Camera v. Na1"l Home Morrg. Corp, 941 So. 2d 395 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)(Where a motion seeking reliefunder Rule 1.540 is unsworn and there is no sworn evidence adduced at the hearing, it is improper to set aside ajudgment). We do not, in any way, malign the trial court’s decision, as the overarching concern in such cases is to address the merits of the lawsuit. The trial court, in fact, should be commended for attempting to afford the Appellee his day in court. However, the Appellee, Who had previously filed many thorough, well-researched, and often exhaustive motions and pleadings, did not even begin to meet the strict legal criteria necessary to establish excusable neglect for his non-appearance at trial. Due to this fact, we remand to the trial court to reinstate the judgment. [*3] REVERSED and REMANDED for proceedings consistent with this opinion. EIG and MIRANDA, JJ., concur. 3% iv we 11¢ 7 figs [*4] CC- Order

P&A

Pieter Pierr V Collect

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE

JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

COUNTY

ELEVENTH

, IN AND FOR MIAM , FLORIDA. AP

I-DADE

PELLATE DIVISION

CASE NUMBER: 15-241 AP LOWER COURT CASE NUMBER: 13--02473-8C an Der Vliet Appellee(s). ions, Inc., Appellant(s), vs. C0 Ill.‘ii _...- FF’, _-I a‘\""“t‘-3M . N’, AppeIIant‘s I]

SPENC

It is so o d Appellate Att0rney’s Fees is hereby: [if Grant to determ Denied.

ER EIG, C

I1’. Motion for _ ,,i WI sit '-"5 ed. The case is remanded to the lower court ine the amount of a reasonable fee. RISTINA MIRANDA, and CHARLES K. JO r ered this

HNSON, JJ

.2fi’i§ I I

SPE

* * * * *

RIST

A MIRANDA

' CHARLES K.

I-INS

.

JEREMY A KOSS, ES

201 A

Q.

PIET

LHAM BRA CIRCLE SUITE 1200 CORAL GABLES, FL 33 Min For Atty Fees rev. I0/23/2008 ON

ER PIERRE VAN DER V

3o84JEFFER 1345111

LIET, PRO SE

SON STREET

MIAMI, FL 33133 *5 It Allill ----=9, v“-$ % I