CASE UPDATE- SERVICE OF PROCESS IN A FORECLOSURE CASE, Humprey v. Deutsche Bank

Barrington Humphrey is the named defendant in a mortgage foreclosure
suit filed by Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. On Humphrey’s motion, the circuit court
quashed the service of process on him. In its order, the circuit court also directed
Humphrey to provide his current address to the Bank. Humphrey challenges this
provision on appeal. The Bank has neither appealed the quashal of service nor filed an
answer brief in response to Humphrey’s appeal. We treat this case as an appeal from a
nonfinal order determining jurisdiction of the person. See Fla. R. App. P.
9.130(a)(3)(C)(i). We reverse.
Without proper service, the court never secured personal jurisdiction over
Humphrey and, thus, had no power over him. That being so, the court had no authority
to direct Humphrey to do anything. See Riddick v. Suncoast Beauty Coll., Inc., 570 So.
2d 1064, 1065-66 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990) (reversing injunction entered against individuals
not named in suit or served); see also Springbrook Commons, Ltd. v. Brown, 761 So. 2d
1192, 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (“If the court is to exercise its power over a person it
must have jurisdiction over that individual. . . . In the absence of personal service or a
statutorily permitted alternative, the court lacks jurisdiction to enter a personal judgment
against the defendant.”).

Humphrey