CESAR LEONEL DIAS
v.
ETTORE PIAQUADIO
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A return of service that is regular on its face is presumed valid, and the party challenging service bears the burden of presenting clear and convincing evidence to rebut this presumption.
[1] A return of service that is regular on its face is presumed to be valid absent clear and convincing evidence presented to the contrary.
[2] The party challenging service of process has the burden of overcoming the presumption of validity of a facially regular return of service by presenting clear and convinci…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“When the return of service is regular on its face, the party challenging the service has the burden of overcoming the presumption of its validity by presenting clear and convincing evidence.”
Gonzalez v. Totalbank, cited for the allocation of burden when challenging service
Appellant Cesar Leonel Dias appealed a judgment in a case involving service of process. The trial court found service valid based on a facially regula…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellant'S Burden To Demonstrate Error cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Robles-Martinez v. Diaz, Reus & Targ, LLP, 88 So. 3d 177, 182 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (observing: “While a plaintiff bears the ultimate burden of proving valid service of process, M.J.W. v. Dep't. of Children & Families, 825 So. 2d 1038, 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), a ‘return of service that is regular on its face is presumed to be valid absent clear and convincing evidence presented to the contrary’“) (quoting Telf Corp. v. Gomez, 671 So. 2d 818, 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)); Gonzalez v. Totalbank, 472 So. 2d 861, 864 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (holding: “When the return of service is regular on its face, the party challenging the service has the burden of overcoming the presumption of its validity by presenting clear and convincing evidence.”) See also Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (holding: “In appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error. . . . When there are issues of fact the appellant necessarily asks the reviewing court to draw conclusions about the evidence.
Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”)
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Gonzalez v. Totalbank, 472 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- Telf Corp. v. Ivon Gomez, 671 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Robles-Martinez v. Diaz, Reus & Targ, LLP, 88 So. 3d 177 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)
- M.J.W. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 825 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)