TRIAL COURT ERRED BY DENYING A RULE 1.540(B)(3) MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT WITHOUT AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING WHERE THE MOTION ALLEGED A COLORABLE FRAUD-BASED CLAIM WITH SUFFICIENT PARTICULARITY

Highsmith v. Britten, 50 Fla. L. Weekly 2648 (Fla. 2d DCA Dec. 17, 2025):

The appellant timely moved to set aside a default judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(3), alleging fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct. The trial court denied the motion without holding a hearing.

The Second DCA reversed. A trial court should conduct an evidentiary hearing when a rule 1.540(b) motion sets forth a colorable entitlement to relief. When the motion is grounded in fraud under rule 1.540(b)(3), the movant must plead the alleged fraud with particularity by setting forth the essential facts that would entitle the movant to relief, not mere legal conclusions.

Here, the motion alleged that an individual holding power of attorney over the plaintiff told the appellant the complaint was “just a legal formality” and that she did not need to respond, leading to a default judgment that adjudicated the plaintiff as owner of property the appellant contended was part of her intestate interest. The court held the motion alleged enough to warrant an evidentiary hearing and remanded for further proceedings.