In short: In De La Torre v. Deutsche Bank (2015), the trial judge excluded the bank’s untranslated Spanish-language document and dismissed the foreclosure, then granted rehearing and reset trial without stated reasons. The homeowner appealed, arguing Rule 1.530 required an actual error. The Third District affirmed without opinion, so the bank’s do-over stood.
The Facts
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, as trustee, filed this Miami-Dade foreclosure in 2012. The Third District affirmed without an opinion, so the facts below come from the record and arguments as described in the oral argument, not from findings by the appellate court.
According to the argument, at the bench trial the bank offered a key document written in Spanish with no English translation. The judge excluded it and granted an involuntary dismissal. The bank moved for rehearing. The judge said the exclusion had been correct, but granted rehearing anyway and reset the case for a new trial “in the interest of justice,” without written reasons.
The homeowner appealed that order. She argued that rehearing under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530 requires some error or omission by the court, that the order contained no findings, and that foreclosure defendants are entitled to the same rules as any other litigant. The bank argued that a trial judge has broad discretion under Rule 1.530 after a non-jury trial, that the judge’s reasons appear in the hearing transcript, and that some of the homeowner’s points were not preserved.
The Decision
On July 15, 2015, the Third District affirmed per curiam without opinion. A per curiam affirmance without opinion (a PCA) is a one-word decision: the appellate court found no reversible error but gave no reasons, so it does not adopt any party’s argument and cannot be cited as precedent.
What the affirmance left standing: the order granting rehearing and resetting trial, so the bank got a second trial despite having lost the first. The panel did not say whether it agreed the judge had discretion to do this, found reasons in the transcript, or decided the homeowner’s objections were not preserved. The case should not be cited as authority on foreign-language evidence or on when rehearing is allowed.
The Law
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530(a) allows a trial judge, after a non-jury trial, to grant a rehearing, open the judgment, take more testimony and enter a new judgment. Rule 1.530(f) says an order granting a new trial must state the specific grounds for it. Appellate courts review these orders for abuse of discretion, which is deferential, and Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(4) allows an order granting a new trial to be appealed using the procedure for final orders.
On the evidence side, a document that the judge and witnesses cannot read is hard to authenticate or rely on. Lenders offering loan records must lay a foundation under the business records exception, section 90.803(6), and authenticate documents under section 90.901; for foreign-language documents that generally means providing an accurate translation in advance.
Lessons
- Winning a trial is not the end if the judge grants rehearing; be ready to oppose a Rule 1.530 motion with specifics, not just the general unfairness of a second chance.
- If an order granting a new trial gives no grounds, object in writing and ask the judge to state them; Rule 1.530(f) requires specific grounds, and silence in the order may be cured by the transcript.
- Lenders: translate foreign-language loan documents before trial. Borrowers: object early when they are not translated.
- Deferential review makes these orders hard to reverse; a PCA is a common result.
Source: De La Torre v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., No. 3D14-1846 — Fla. 3d DCA (July 15, 2015).
Watch the Oral Argument
This is the recording of the actual oral argument, posted on the channel. What lawyers and judges say at argument is not the ruling; the decision is summarized above.
Bank Loses Foreclosure Trial Over Spanish Document — Gets a Do-Over? | De La Torre, 3D14-1846
Go Deeper
- Florida Foreclosure Trials: Business Records, the Original Note, and Preserving Defenses
- How Appeals Work in Florida: The 30-Day Deadline, Costs, and What a PCA Means
- The Florida Foreclosure Process, Step by Step
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a Florida judge grant a new foreclosure trial after dismissing the case?
Yes. After a non-jury trial, Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530 lets the judge grant rehearing, reopen the judgment and take more evidence. The order should state its grounds, but appellate courts review the decision for abuse of discretion. In De La Torre, the order resetting trial survived appeal.
What is an involuntary dismissal in a Florida foreclosure trial?
It is a ruling, usually after the plaintiff rests, that the plaintiff has not proven its case. In foreclosure that often happens when the bank cannot get key documents into evidence. The bank can move for rehearing, appeal, or in some cases refile, so a dismissal is not always the final word.
Does a Spanish-language document need a translation in a Florida court?
As a practical matter, yes. Florida court proceedings are in English, and a party relying on a foreign-language document should provide an accurate English translation so the judge can read it and the other side can test it. Without one, the document may be excluded, as happened at the first trial in this case.
Can I appeal an order granting a new trial in Florida?
Yes. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(4) allows review of orders granting a new trial using the final-appeal procedure, and the notice of appeal is generally due within 30 days. But the standard is abuse of discretion, so the appealing party has an uphill fight.
Talk to a Florida foreclosure defense lawyer
Weidner Law, P.A. has defended Florida homeowners in foreclosure and foreclosure appeals for more than 25 years. If you need a foreclosure defense lawyer, call (727) 954-8752 or email weidner@mattweidnerlaw.com.
Read the law yourself, free: every Florida statute and court rule is on floridarules.net.
This article is general information about Florida law, not legal advice about your situation. Reading it, watching the videos, or contacting the firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case turns on its own facts, and past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements.
