Anastacia S. Lacombe and Max P. Lacombe vs Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, etc.| FL 1st DCA - Bank’s documents and witness did not prove the bank’s standing to bring the foreclosure action.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
ANASTACIA S. LACOMBE and MAX P. LACOMBE Appellants v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, as Trustee for LONG BEACH MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST Appellee Opinion filed October 14, 2014. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. A. C. Soud, Jr. , Judge. Austin T. Brown of Parker & DuFresne, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellant. Jeffrey S. York and N. Mark New, II of McGlinchey Stafford, Jacksonville and Latoya O. Fairclough, Choice Legal Group, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. The Lacombes, defendants below,appeal the final judgment of foreclosure against them and in favor of Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., as Trustee for Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-2 (“Deutsche Bank”). Appellants assert that the evidence presented at the bench trial was insufficient to support the trial court’s judgment because Deutsche Bank’s documents and witness did not prove the bank ’s standing to bring the foreclosure action. We agree and the judgment is thus reversed. Because the final judgment was based on a bench trial and Appellants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment, the general rule requiring specific contemporaneous objection to preserve the asserted error for appeal does not apply. Rather, rule 1.530(e), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure allows review of the sufficiency of the evidence despite any deficiencies in the objections made at trial and absence of post - trial motions. Rule 1.530(e) applies to appeals challenging the sufficiency of the evidence in mortgage foreclosure actions after bench tr ial. See Correa v. U.S. Bank N.A. , 118 So. 3d 952, 954 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). Accordingly, Appellants’ challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence is properly before this court.