You are on page 1of 49

IN TEE DZSTRlCT COURT OF APPEAt

FOR THE SECOND DISTRICT


STATE OF FLORIDA
MARK A. ADAMS

Appelfant,
V.

E*TRADE BANK,

ON APPEAL FROM TWE CIRCUIT COURT


OF THE rnRTEENTEE rnICLAZ, C R C m
IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTr', FLORIDA
APPEILAIU'S IMTM, BRIEF

Mark A.. Adams, AppeIlamt


4129 Balington Drive
Vdrico, FL 33596
Telephone: 8136534350

....*m..a.,.w.m.3

TABLE OF CITATTONS .......................

. . . . ** .aI m
. . ,am
.

STATEMENT OF TWE CASE .....................

.....,....~~Ca..m...,.,..m.~m.~m..m~.

3-8

COUNSEL FOR E * W E BANK FAILED TO INVOKE


THELOWER COURT'S JMUSDICX?ON OVER T"EE
I D ~ M I A P P E BY
L S~U B S T I T W E SERWCE OF
TWE C O P d P W ON THE FLORTDA SECRETARY OF STATE

COUNSEL FOR E*TRA.DEBANK FALED TO INVOKE


THELOVER COURT'S JURISDICTION OVER THE
DEFEND;ANT/APPELLANTBY FAILING TO COMPLY
WlTH FLORIDA STATUTES 48.161

A OF
T SERVICE
E
........................................................

CERmCAm OF COMPLIANCE

~4

........................ ,,.............I...,......... 15

TABLE OF CITATIONS
CASES

Alvwado v Chwros. 991 So.2d 585.58 8.89 (Fla.3d DCA 2006)...............9, 10


L h k e v.Sckarlau, 353 So2d 961 (FIa2d DCA 1978).

...........................9.10
.

Esberger v.First FIa.Bus. Cons~ItaPrts~


he., 338 Sa2d 561 (Ha26 DCA 1976) 9

Feqpson v. Mc Williams. 483 Sa2d 509 (Y?la,4th DCA 1986).......................10

HenseheleSbebm Co. v. Hmry Schom. Inc., 302 202d 198 (Fla 4th DCA 1974)..9

. Bate F m .32 So.36 695 (Fla4&DCA 2010) .................. ..9. 9.0


Mecca Multimedia, IIIG
. v.Kednbard 954 So2d 1179 a.3d DCA 2007) .....9. 10
Momco v. Nealon. 8 10 So.2d 10849I 085 (Ela 4th DCA 2002)..................9. 2 3
-*Art Dental v. V+ate@c Etmrp. 986 602d 1244 (FIa.2008)....................4
H&ezv

P.S.R Asmciata v.Ankraff3HMh.364 So2d 855 @a 2d DCA 1978)........-12


Smith v.Laman. 826 So.2d 1077 ma.2d DCA 2002)................................12

Wyatt v. Haese. 649 So.2d 905 (Fla.4th DCA 1995).......*...*........*..............


13
STATUTES

Florida Statutes 148.161.........................


......................................a.
12
Fforidastatzztes 4 48.181 ..............
.
......................................4 10. 11. 12
STATEMENT OF TNECASE
On December 30. 2015. S mior Judge Sandra Taylor e

d by entering the

Otder an Plaintiffs Motion for Judicd Default, the n o n - M order which is the

subject ofthis appeal, which granted an hpropdly requested default' and denied
the Defendants' Motion to Quash Substitute Service of Process and Dismiss this

Action which thereby e m n m l y dekmhed that the lower court had acquired
jurisdiction over the person of the Defendants and their prqmty- (App. A.) The
foregoing Order was rendered on December 31,2015. (Am. A.) The

DefendantlAppelllmt, MARK k ADAMS, timely filed his Notice ofAppeal of

this nan-final Order on February 1,2016. (See App. B, page 5 ofthe lower
tribunal's dock&) The facts pertinent ta this a

m are as fol~ows:

The record shows that an March 18,202 5, counsel for E * W E BANK


attempted to invoke the lower court's jurisdiction over the Defendants and the
property at issue by substitute service ofprocess pursuant to Florida Statutes 5
48.18 1by s d g Mias Summanses d copies ofthe Campla& an the Fbrida

Secretary of State. (App. C,the Nutice ofFWg the Return of Service by counsel

far E*TRADE BANR which includes the I&

achowledging acceptance by the

Florida lhprtmmt of State,the Alias Summons, arrd the Complaint without the
exhiIbits wEch are not p d n e n t b this appeal.)

Ha. R Civ. Pro. 1.500Cc) provides, "A party may plead or othemise defend at
my time befure default is entered." Moreover, Florida"s appellate courts have
uniformly recognized that it is impper to enter a default when defensive mutiom
have been filed before entry ofa default. Pro-Art Dental v. V-SdrategicGroyp,
986 So.2d 2244, 1259 (Fla 2008). Therefore, it was improper for counsel for
E + W EBANK to set its Motion for Judicial Default to be heard at the same
time as the Defendants' Motions to Quash Substitute Service of Process.

The Campla.intwhich was sewed on the Florida S e m e t q sfState on March


18,2015 does not contain any of the allegations which are required to invoke the

lower court's jurisdiction over theDefendantlAppellant or his p r o m . (App. C,


pages 4-6.)

The &shows that almosttwomonths later on May 11,2015, muasel.far


E8TRADE BANK filed n Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint along with an

Anended Complaint and that on June 22,201 5, the lower court granted leave to

file the Amended Complaint. (App. B,page 4.) The record does not show that any
attempt was made to serve process with the Amended Complaint on the Florida
Serretary of State or on any Defendants. (App. B,page 4-5.)

Fifteen (15)days later, on July 7,201 5, counsel fur E*TRADEBAMK filed


the Plaintiffs Motion for Judicial Default and aNdice ofHearing setting the same

to be heard on August 18,2015. (App. B,page 4.) In the Plaintiffs Motion for
Judicial Default, comseI for E * W E BANK frivoI~us1yargued that a d e M t

should be entered because the Defendants' response to the Amended Complaint


was due an or before July 3,2015. (App. D.) However, mwmel for E*T'IWDE

BANK was well aware that the Defendants had not attended the hearing on

E*T'RA.DE BANK'SMotion for Leave to Amend CmpIaint on June 22,2015 and

thatthe record showed that the Amended Complaint had not been personally
served a any Defendant or the Florida Secretary of State. (App. B,page 4.)

OnAugust 17,2015, the Defmdan~AppeIlmttiled his Mbtion to Quash

Substime Senice of Process and a s m i s s this Action, served.the same to conuse1


for E*TMDE BANK via Eacsimile and U.S. Mail, and requested cmce11ation of
the hearing on E*TRADE BANK'SMotion for Judicial Default. Olpp. E.) In spite
ofthe fixegoing, the record shows that coumeZ for E*'lrZIADE SANK did not

cancel the hearing on its Motion for Judicial Default (App. B, page 4.) However,
the lower court pperly reviewed the file and did not enter any ader granting a

default as a mult ofthe fimt hearing on EeTRADE BANK'S Motion fur Judicial
Defhult. (App. B3page 4.)

Defendant/Appellant's Motion to Quash Substitute Service ofProcess an$


Dismiss this Aetion pointed out that the record showed that cornsel for E*TRAD'E

BANK had not filed m y return receipts showing d c e by certified don any

Defendant and that no affidavit of complimce had Been filed. (App. E.)

To date, the record of the lower court still shows .that counsel far E*TRADE
BANK has not filed any return receipts showing service by edified mil an any
Defendant and that no affidavit of compliance has been filed (App. B,pages 3-51

In spite ofthe foregoing, on October 27,201 5, counsel for E*TRADE


BANK impmply and lll~ethicallyfiled a Notice ofHearing rescheduling

E * W E BANK9 Motion for Judicial Defiult to be heard on Decmber 30,


2015 which also set the Defendants' Motions to Quash Substitute S&ce

of

Process and Dismiss this Action to be heard at the same time. (App. F.) Note that
the Notice of Hearing does not give notice that the hearing is one at which

evidence will be taka. (App. F.) Also, note that inthe Notice ofHearing, counsel

for E*TI'U.DEBANK c d e d that he had "made a good faith effort to resolve the

foregoing issuesf' prior to noticing this hearing. (App. F.) H o m e r , counsel for

E*TRADEBANK made no e f h t to contact the DefmdantJAppeIImt prior to


improperly and m&cally rescheduling E t W E BBANR Motion for Judicial

Defiiult to be heard at the same time as the Defendants' Motions to -Quash


Substitute Service ofProcess and Dismiss this Adon during the middle ofthe

holiday season.
On December 29,2015,the lhfbndmt/Appe1.lantfiled his Amended Motion

to Quash Substitute S d c e o f m e s s and Dismiss this Action and m

d the

same to comet for E*TMDE BANK via fhcsimi!e and US. MaiI. (App. G.)

The DefenWAppelht's Amended Motion to Qua& Substitute Service of


Procms md Dismiss this Action reitemted that counsel for E*TRADE BANK had
n d filed any return receipts sh-

service by

certified mail on any hfcndant

and that no affidavit ofcompliance had been fled, snd it pointed out that the
original Complaint which was m e d on the Florida Secretary of State did not
contain the jurisdictional dlegatlons necessary to constitute the Sem@lafy of State
as agent fm substituted d

c e ofprocess.

(App. G.) To dab, the

DefendmdAppe1lant's Amended Motim to Quash Substit& Service of h c e s s


and Dismiss this Action hss not been set for hearing and has not been heard. (App.

B,pages 4-5.)

To dz&,

the recond ofthe lower court still shows that comse1for E*TRADE

BAMC has not filed any return receipts showing sentice by certifid mail m my

Defendant and that no affidavit of compIimce has been filed. (App. B,pages 3-5 .)

SW'MMARY OF ARGUMENT
Counsel for E*TRADE BANK failed in his attempt to invoke the lower
court's jurisdiction over the DefendantlAppdlant and his property by substitute

setvice of the Complaint on the Florida Secretary of State because the Complaint

did not dlege the jurisdictid mpimnents prescribed by -me

for substitute

service and because counsel for E*TRADE BANK did not file any return receipts

showing s e ~ c by
e certified mail on any Defendant and did not file m y affidavit
ofcompliance. Therefore, the lower court erred by entering the Order an

RaintiFs Motion fmJudicial IkMt which denied the DefmdadAppellarrt9s


Motions to Quash Substitute Service o f b s s and this Court should eater an
order reversing the holding in the lower court's Order on Plaintiffs Motion for

Judicial Default which denied the Defendants' Motion to Quash Subs?ituteS d c e


of Process and Dismiss this Action.

"A trial court's ruling on a motion to quash service ofprocess consists of a


question of law subject to a de novo standard of d e w . " &e, e.g, W&a

State F m Mut. Auto. Xm,Co., 32 So. 3d 695,698

v.

ma.4th DCA 2010) citing

Mecca jtvialtirnedia, IIZC~


v. Kmbard, 954 So2d 1 179,Z181 @la 3d DCA 2007).
Because statutes allowing substituted service are an exception to the general rule
mpirhg a defendant to be personally served, there m w be &ict compliance with
the m

y mpirments. Id citing Monaco v. NeaIon, 810 &.Zd

1084,1085

(Fla 4th Dek 2002) and AIwado v. Cisnems, 918 Sa.2d 585,588-89 (Fla. 36:
DCA 2006).

COWSEL FOR E*TMDE BANK FAILED TO INVOKE


TEE LOWER COURT" S J D I C T I O N OVER THE
D m A N T " / A P P E L L N BY SUBSJ?TUTE SERVICE OF
THE C O W M I N T ON TEE FLORIDA SECFETARY OF STATE

"To support substF.tutdservice ofprocess on a defendant, the camplaint


must allege the jurisdictional ~cpimnats
prescribed by &We. If it fails to do so,

then a motion to quash process and senrice of process should be granted"Drake v.


Schfuti,353 30.2d 961,964 (Fla 2d DCA 1978) citing fiberger

v. FirstR&&

Bersinass CmuItmt%,Inc., 338 S0.2d 561 (3%. 2d DCA 1979 andHe3fsckelS~a'natcCompany v. Hmry S c W , Inc.,302 So.Zd 198 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). See

Alvwado v. Cimms, 919 So.2d 585 (Fla3d DCA 2006) and F e r p o n v.

If thejutisdictional mqukments prescribed by sMuk are not alleged in the


comp!aint, the Secretary of State is not authorizedto accept service ofprocess. See,
e.g.,Ei-a

at 699.

Florida Statute3 5 48.181 'WtsFIorida's Secretmy of State to accept


service m behalf of a nomident defendant or a resident defendant who

subsequent1y becomes a non-resident or who conceals his or her whereabouts and

who engages in or carries on a business vatwe in the state." Mecca at 11.82.

Moreover*this Court has held that filing an amended complaint and simply

delivering it to the defendants after serving a complaint witllout the required


jurisdictiof181allegations on the Florida Sect\etary a f State d m not confer
jurisdEicti~1. Drake at 963-964.

The f

e d shows that ora March 18,2015, m e 1 for E*TRADE BANK

attempted to invoke the lower court's jurisdiction over the Defendants and the
pmperty at issue by substitute service ofprocess pursuant to Florida Statutes 5

48.1 81 by serving Alias Summonses and copies of the Complaint on the Florida

Secretary of State* (App. C.)

However, the Complaint which was served on the Florida Secretay of State
makes no allegations about the residency of the DefedandAppeilmt, no

allegations about the Defmdaflt/Appdlazltconcealing his whereabouts, and arr


allegations about the Defdmt/Appe1lant conducting business in the state. (App.

C,pages 4-6.) Therefore, the Complaint which was served on the Florida
Secretrny of State was insufficient to p v i d e the lower court with personal

jurisdiction overthe DefendantlAppellant md his pmpdy.


Apparently, counsel for E*TRADE BANK realized this failme and
attempted to cure:it by fling an Amended Camplaint on May 11,2015. (App. B,

page 4.) Howeverpcounsel for E*TRADE BANK failed to personally seme the
Amended Complaint an the MmdmdAppellmt or on the Florida Secretary of
State. (App. B,pages 4-5,)

As counsel for E*TRADEBANK served &e Complaint which lacked


allegations ofthe jurisdidional requirements prescriw by Notids Statutes 8
48.1 81 on the Florida Secretary of State and failed to penonally serve the

Amended Complaint on the DefmdantlApellant or on the Florida Secretary of


State, his actions did not p v i d e the lower court with persod jurisdiction over the

DefendadAppellant and his property, and thesefore, this Court should enter an
order reversing the holding in the lower court9sQrdm on Plaintiffs Motim for

Judicial IDefiuft which. denied the J3efmht-s'Motion to Quash Substitute Sennice

oflbcess md Dismiss this Action,

COUNSEL FOR E*TRADEBANK FAIE.ED TO INVOKE


THE LOWER COURT'S S S D I C T I O N OVER TEE
DEFEP4QANTJAPPELLm BY FAILING TO COMPLY
WTTH FLORIDA STATUTES 9 48-162

"If the plaintiff chooses substituted service on the Secretary of State under
Section 48.18 1(1), then perfection of such substituted service requires fuI1

mrnpZirmce with ane ofthe alternative methods provided by Section 48.1 61." P.S.

R. Associates v. ArtmItf%-Hed?z,364 Sodd 855,857 ma. 2d.DCA 1978).


" S d o n 48.161, which a l h for s u b & W service of process on at Florida

resident who is concealing his whereabouts, creates an exception to the g a d


rule that the defendant must be personally served. The statnte coatalas three

reqnirementr: (1) the plaintiff mnst send notfee of service and a eopy of the
process by registered or certified mail to the defendant; (2) the plaintiff most

file the defendeaPs retorn receipt; sad (3) the plaintiff most file an affidavit of

compliance." Smith v. Leuman, 826 So2d 1077,1078 (FEa 2d DCA 2002).


@mphasis added.)

"Failute ta timely file an affidavit of compliance done warmits quashing of


the substituted service." Mo~co
v. Nealon, 8810 So. 2d 1084,1086 (Fh 4th DCA

2002) citing Wyatt v. Ham, 649 So.2d 905,907-908 (Fia4th BCA 1995).

To date, the record ofthe lower court stiIX shows that counsel for E*TRADE

BANK has not filed any return receipts showing service by certified mail on any
Defendant and that no &davit of compliance has been filed (App. B,pages 3-5,)

As the record shows that come1 for E*TMDE BANK did not file any
retum recei*

&owing service by certified mail on my Defendant and did not file

any aEdavit ofcompliance, his actions did not provide the lower court with

personal jurisdiction over the DefmdantlAppellant and his property, and thenfore,

this Court should enter an order reversing the holding in the lower court's Order on

PfaintiFs Motion for Judicial Defhult which denied the Defendants' Mution t~
Quash Substime Service sfProcess and Dimiss this Action.

Counsel for E*TR.A.DEBANK failed inhis attempt to invoke the lower


court's jurisdiction over the Defen$ant/AppeIlant md his property by substitute
service ofthe Complajnt on the Florida S e c m t q of State because the Complaint

did not allege the jurisdictional rqukrnents prescribed by statute fbr substitute?
service and becam coumeZ for E*T'M.DEBANK did nat file any return receipts

showing senrice by certified mail on any Defendant and did not file any dEdavit

of compliance. Therefore, the lower court emd by entering the Order on


Plaintiffs Motion for Judicial Default which denied the DefenWAppellant's

Motion fnQuash Substitute S d c e ofProcess and this Court should enter an order
reversing the holding in the lower court's M e r on Plaintiff's Motion for Judicial
Default which denied the DefmWAppe1ht7sMotion to Quash Substitute
S e ~ c of
e h e s s an8 Dimiss this Action.

CERTIF'ICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy hereof was served by U.S. Mail to
counsel for the Appellee, A L W S mELDS of KOPEIXWITZ OSTROW, at One
West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500, Ft.Lauderdale, FL 33301; facsimile number 954-

Mark A, A h s
4129 Balington Dive
Vdrico, FL 33596
TeIephme: 8 13453-450

I HEREBY CERTIFY thatthis document complies with the requirements of

Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.21O(aX2).

Mark A. A h s
4129 Bdhgton f i v e
Vafrim, Ft 33596
Telephone: 8 13-6534350

IN TEE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL


FOR THE SECOND DISTRICT
STATE OF FLORIDA
Case No.:

2D16-474
L.T. NU.: 09-614-028773

Appellant,

E"TRADE BANK,
Appellee.

APPELLANT'S APPENDIX TO INITIAL BRIEF

Certified copy of the Order under review. ..........................................

Tab A

Lower Tribunal's Docket through filing of Notice of Appeal.. .................. Tab B

Notice of Filing the Return of Service by counsel for


E*?RA.DE BANK which includes the letter acknowledging
acceptance by the Florida Department of State, the Alias
Summons, and the Complaint without the exhibits which are
not pertinent to this appeal. ............................................................

Tab C

Plaintiffs Motion for Judicial Default. .............................................. Tab D

DefendantlAppellantYsMotion to Quash Substitute Service

of Process and Dismiss this Action.. .................................................

Tab E

Certified copy of E*TMDE BANK'S Notice of Hearing on its


Motion for Judicial Default and the Defendants' Motions to
Quash Substitute Service to be heard on December 3 0,201 5 . . ..................
Tab F
DefenddAppeIlant 's Amended Motion to Quash Substitute
Sewice ofProcess and Dismiss this Action......................................... Tab G

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that .a copy hereof and the attachments hereto were
served by U.S. Mail to counsel for the Appellee, ALEXIS FIELDS of

KOPELOWITZ OSTRQW, P.A., at One West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500, Ft.

Lauderdale, FL 33301; facsimile number 954-525-4300 on this

'+
Y{hy

April, 2016.

Mark A. Adams
4129 Balington Drive
Valrico, FL 33596
Telephone: 8 13-653-4350

of

Appendix A

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 13THJUDlCIAt CIRCUIT,

IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA

CASE NO.:2009-28773 Div. B


E*TRADE BANK,
Plaintiff,

0-

VS.

MARK A, ADAMS; BUCKHQRN PRESERVE


HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS, INC.;
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; LISA S.ADAMS;
UNKNOWN TENANTES), 1N POSSESSlON
OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,

Defendants.

<

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL DEFAULT

for Judicial Default against


Defendants, MARK ADAMS and LISA ADAMS, and the Court having reviewed the file
and being duly advised on the premises, it is hereby ordered and adjudged that:
I.The Plaintiff's Motion for Judicial Default: against Defendants MARK ADAMS and
LISA ADAMS is hereby GRANTED for failure to timely file a responsive pleading to the
This matter came before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion

DONE AND ORDERED at the Chamber in Hillsborough County, Florida, this 30th
.-,! ,. , IS -0 CEZ7-'FYTHAT THE FCREOOING IS A TRUE
AM12 COnRFCT CGTY OF THE DOCUVchiT Obk FILE

Circuit Judge

Craig B. Stein, Esq., Kopelowita ~ s t % w P.A..


,
[stein@kolawveis.com].
Robert L. Tankel, Esquire, Attorney for Beckhorn Preserve HOA, f022 Main Street,
Suite D, Dunedin, Florida 34698:
Mask A. Adams and Lisa S. Adarns, 4129 Balington Drive, Valrico, Florida 33596;
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., c/o 101 North Phillips Ave, Sioux Falls, SD 57104;
Current Resident 4129 Balington Drive, Valrico, Florida 33596.

Appendix B

http://pubrec10.hillsclerk.com/Unsecured/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=2388560

Skip to Main Content Logout My Account Search Menu New Civil Search Refine Search Back

Location : Hillsborough County, FL Help

CASE SUMMARY
CASE NO. 09-CA-028773
E*TRADE BANK vsWELLS FARGO BANK, N.A

Case Type:
Date Filed:
Location:
Judicial Officer:
Uniform Case Number:

Mortgage Foreclosure
11/17/2009
Division M
Div M, Senior Judge
292009CA028773A001HC

PARTY INFORMATION
Attorneys
Defendant

ADAMS, LISA S

Defendant

ADAMS, MARK A

Defendant

BUCKHORN PRESERVE HOA INC

Defendant

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A

Plaintiff

E*TRADE BANK

ROBERT L TANKEL
Retained
727-736-1901(W)

LEONARD TOWNSEND,
Esquire
Retained
561-613-8763(W)

CRAIG BRETT STEIN, Esquire


Retained
954-862-8577(W)

DALE L FRIEDMAN
Retained
954-961-1400(W)

REBECCA SOPHIA NILSEN


Retained
561-300-6452(W)

EVENTS & ORDERS OF THE COURT


OTHER EVENTS AND HEARINGS
11/10/2009 COMPLAINT
USER ID=STAFORDM
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
11/10/2009 VALUE OF MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE REAL PROPERTY CLAIM FORM
USER ID=STAFORDM
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
11/10/2009 CIVIL COVER SHEET
USER ID=STAFORDM
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
11/10/2009 LIS PENDENS
USER ID=STAFORDM
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
11/17/2009 SUMMONS ISSUED
X5. USER ID=STAFORDM
11/17/2009 CONVERTED EVENT
RCPT - RECEIPT. 17-NOV-2009,$955.00, User Id = STAFORDM, Receipt No = 1701769. USER ID=STAFORDM
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
01/21/2010 ANSWER AND DEFENSES OF
BUCKHORN PRESERVE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC. USER ID=GRAHAMD
04/14/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED NOT SERVED
UNKNOWN TENANT . USER ID=BLACKMANJU
04/14/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED SERVED
11/20/09 WELLS FARGO BANK NA. USER ID=BLACKMANJU

1 of 6

2/2/2016 7:29 PM

http://pubrec10.hillsclerk.com/Unsecured/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=2388560

04/14/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED SERVED


11/19/10 BUCKHORN PRESERVE HOA INC. USER ID=BLACKMANJU
04/14/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED NOT SERVED
LISA S ADAMS. USER ID=BLACKMANJU
04/14/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED NOT SERVED
MARK A ADAMS. USER ID=BLACKMANJU
04/16/2010 CONVERTED EVENT
RCPT - RECEIPT. 16-APR-2010,$30.00, User Id = STAFORDM, Receipt No = 1802443. USER ID=STAFORDM
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
04/21/2010 SUMMONS ISSUED
ALIAS X3 PREVIOUSLY PAID 4/16/10. USER ID=HIPSON
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
05/25/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED NOT SERVED
UNKNOWN TENANT(S). USER ID=BLACKMANJU
05/25/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED NOT SERVED
ADAMS, LISA S.. USER ID=VIRGILS
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
05/25/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED NOT SERVED
ADAMS, MARK A.. USER ID=VIRGILS
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
07/02/2010 AFFIDAVIT OF NON SERVICE
MARK A ADAMS. USER ID=BLACKMANJU
07/02/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED NOT SERVED
LISA S ADAMS. USER ID=BLACKMANJU
07/02/2010 SUMMONS RETURNED NOT SERVED
UNKNOWN TENANT(S). USER ID=BLACKMANJU
08/04/2010 AFFIDAVIT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS BY PUBLICATION
CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE BY PUBLICATION ON LISA S. ADAMS & MARK A. ADAMS. USER ID=BROWNSA
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
08/04/2010 NOTICE OF ACTION COPY SENT TO NEWSPAPER
TAMPA RECORD: ON OR BEFORE DATE: SEPTEMBER 13, 2010. USER ID=BROWNSA
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
08/04/2010 CORRESPONDENCE
BIKI RAJAK, LEGAL ASSISTANT. USER ID=BROWNSA
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
08/04/2010 AFFIDAVIT
DILIGENT SEARCH AND INQUIRY ON MARK A. ADAMS. USER ID=BROWNSA
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
08/04/2010 AFFIDAVIT
DILIGENT SEARCH AND INQUIRY ON LISA S. ADAMS. USER ID=BROWNSA
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
08/04/2010 COPY OF NOTICE AND PLEADINGS MAILED TO
LISA ADAMS 4129 BALINGTON DR. VALRICO FL 33594. USER ID=BROWNSA
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
08/04/2010 COPY OF NOTICE AND PLEADINGS MAILED TO
MARK A. ADAMS 4129 BALINGTON DR. VALRICO FL 33594. USER ID=BROWNSA
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
08/24/2010 PROOF OF PUBLICATION
NOA TO LISA S ADAMS; MARK A AAMS; OOB 9/13/10. USER ID=NEWSOMEF
09/13/2010 MOTION TO - FOR
ENLARGE TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT - (DEFEDANT LISA S ADAMS). USER ID=TRICE
09/13/2010 MOTION TO - FOR
ENLARGE TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT - (DEFENDANT MARK A ADAMS). USER ID=TRICE
09/20/2010 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE
BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING LP. USER ID=GRAHAMD
05/01/2012 NOTICE OF INTENT TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION
HEARING ON 07/10/12 AT 11:00 AM - CTRM 500
06/26/2012 NOTICE OF FILING
COPY ATTAC NOTICE OF INTENT TO ACCELERATE 02/17/2009
07/10/2012 Dismissal Docket (11:00 AM) (Judicial Officer Judge, Presiding)
07/10/2012 X'D OUT NOT SIGNED BY JUDGE
ORDER TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION - SET CMC 60 DAYS
07/16/2013 ORDER SCHEDULING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE (Judicial Officer: Div M, Senior Judge )
ON 08/27/13 AT 9:00 AM, CTRM 500 07/11/13 WST FOR ST
Date Signed: 07/11/2013
07/23/2013 NOTICE OF SERVICE
OF ORDER SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 8-27-13
08/14/2013 NOTICE OF SERVICE
FOR FORECLOSURE ORD. SETTING CAUSE FOR NJT
08/20/2013 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE
OF LEAD COUNSEL AND DESIGNATION OF EMAIL ADDRESS / LEONARD TOWNSEND, ESQ.
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
08/20/2013 E-FILED REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO BE ISSUED
08/20/2013 E-FILED REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO BE ISSUED
08/21/2013 E-FILED 20 DAYS SUMMONS ISSUED
X2 eservice@clegalgroup.com
08/26/2013 MOTION TO QUASH
CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE OF PROCESS, VACATE ORDER SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND DISMISS THIS ACTION
Party: ADAMS, MARK A

2 of 6

2/2/2016 7:29 PM

http://pubrec10.hillsclerk.com/Unsecured/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=2388560

08/26/2013 NOTICE
OF TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE FOR THE IMPROPERLY ORDERED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR 8/27/2013
@9:00AM
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
08/27/2013 MOTION FOR DEFAULT
BY COURT AGAINST MARK A. ADAMS AND LISA S. ADAMS
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
09/04/2013 RESPONSE
TO MOTION FOR DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANTS
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
09/04/2013 RESPONSE
TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR DEFAULT AGAINST DEFENDANTS
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
10/08/2013 MOTION FOR SUBSTITUTION OF PARTY
E TRADE BANK SHALL BE SUBSITUTUED FOR BAC HOME LOANS
Party: HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
10/08/2013 NOTICE OF CHANGE OF FIRM NAME
THE LAW OFFICES OF MARSHALL C. WATSON, PA CHANGED TO CHOICE LEGAL GROUP, PA
10/08/2013 NOTICE
OF LEAD COUNSEL AND DESIGNATION OF EMAIL ADDRESS / AMELIA BERSON, ESQ
10/22/2013 ORDER FOR SUBSTITUTION OF (Judicial Officer: Div M, Senior Judge )
PARTY PLAINTIFF - E*TRADE BANK SUBSTITUTED FOR BAC HOME LOANS - JRP 10/17/13
Date Signed: 10/17/2013
10/23/2013 MOTION TO - FOR
FOR SUBSTITUTION OF COUNSEL FOR PLTF
Party: E*TRADE BANK
09/30/2014 ORDER TO SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL (Judicial Officer: Div M, Senior Judge )
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW PA SUBSTITUTED AS COUNSEL - JRP 09/24/14
Party:
E*TRADE BANK
Date Signed: 09/24/2014
12/01/2014 PROOF OF PUBLICATION NOTICE OF ACTION
Party:
ADAMS, LISA S
Party:
ADAMS, MARK A
Publish Date: 08/12/2010
12/03/2014 NOTICE OF HEARING
01/21/2015 11 AM MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE
12/12/2014 AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING
1/21/15 @ 11 A.M.
01/20/2015 AMENDED MOTION TO - FOR
QUASH CONSTRUCTIVE SERVICE OF PROCESS AND DISMISS THIS ACTION
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
01/30/2015 EVIDENCE DATA SHEET
#11769
02/02/2015 ORDER ON
MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF PROCESS, VACATE ORDER SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND MOTION TO
DISMISS - MOTION IS SET FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON 02/17/15 @1:30PM CR 500 - ST 01/29/15
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
02/03/2015 NOTICE OF HEARING
EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON 02/17/15 AT 1:30 PM
02/17/2015 ORDER ON - TO - FOR (Judicial Officer: Div M, Senior Judge )
ORDER ON DEFENDANT MARK A. ADAMS' AMENDED MOTION TO SQUASH CONTRUCTIVE SERVICE OF PROCESS AND DISMISS
ACTION. 1. GRANTED. 2. PLAINTIFF'S ORE TENUS MOTION FOR EXTENSIONOF TIME TO SERVE DEFENDANT IS GRANTED.
PLAINTIFF HAS ONE HUNDRED TWENTY (120) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER TO EFFECTUATE SERVICE. JUDGE S.TAYLOR
02/17/2015
Date Signed: 02/17/2015
02/18/2015 E-FILED REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO BE ISSUED
02/18/2015 E-FILED REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO BE ISSUED
02/19/2015 E-FILED PLURIES 20 DAYS SUMMONS ISSUED
X2 STEIN@KOLAWYERS.COM
03/16/2015 E-FILED REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO BE ISSUED
03/16/2015 E-FILED REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO BE ISSUED
03/16/2015 E-FILED ALIAS 20 DAYS SUMMONS ISSUED
X2 STEIN@KOLAWYERS.COM
03/17/2015 NOTICE OF HEARING
05/29/15 @9AM CR 500
03/18/2015 AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING
OF 05/29/15 AT 9:00 AM
03/24/2015 NOTICE OF FILING
RETURN OF SERVICE ON LISA ADAMS AND MARK ADAMS
03/24/2015 SUMMONS RETURNED SERVED
3/18/15
Party:
ADAMS, MARK A
Date Served: 03/18/2015
03/24/2015 SUMMONS RETURNED SERVED
3/18/15
Party:
ADAMS, LISA S
Date Served: 03/18/2015
03/27/2015 NOTICE OF FILING
AFFIDAVITS OF EVASION

3 of 6

2/2/2016 7:29 PM

http://pubrec10.hillsclerk.com/Unsecured/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=2388560

03/27/2015 AFFIDAVIT
OF EVASION FOR LISA S. ADAMS
03/27/2015 AFFIDAVIT
OF EVASION FOR MARK A. ADAMS
03/30/2015 SUMMONS RETURNED SERVED
LISA ADAMS ON MARCH 18, 2015
03/30/2015 SUMMONS RETURNED SERVED
MARK ADAMS ON 3/18/15
04/03/2015 COPY OF
AFFT OF EVASION FOR MARK A. ADAMS RTN'D NON-SERVED
04/03/2015 COPY OF
AFFT OF EVASION FOR LIDA S. ADAMS RTN'D NON-SERVED
04/07/2015 MOTION TO - FOR
ENLARGE TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
04/07/2015 MOTION TO - FOR
ENLARGE TIME TO RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
04/08/2015 NOTICE OF HEARING
DATE: APRIL 29,2015 TIME: 11:00A.M.
04/22/2015 NOTICE OF FILING
CORRESPONDENCE FROM DEFENDANT, MARK ADAMS
04/22/2015 CORRESPONDENCE
FROM DEFENDANT, MARK ADAMS
04/27/2015 NOTICE OF CANCELLING HEARING
APRIL 29, 2015 HEARING HAS BEEN CANCELLED.
05/11/2015 MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT
FOR FORECLOSURE
Party: E*TRADE BANK
05/12/2015 NOTICE OF HEARING
05/29/15 @ 9:00AM CTRM 513 PLTFS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR FORECLOSURE
05/12/2015 NOTICE OF CANCELLING HEARING
05/29/15 @ 9:00AM
05/18/2015 NOTICE OF HEARING
JUNE 22, 2015, ROOM 513
05/19/2015 ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Party: BUCKHORN PRESERVE HOA INC
05/21/2015 MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME
TO SERVE DEFENDANTS
Party: E*TRADE BANK
06/17/2015 AMENDED NOTICE OF HEARING
06/22/2015 9 AM
06/22/2015 ORDER ON
PAINITFF'S MOTION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME TO SERVE DEFENDANT'S....GRANTED.......06/22/15 ST
Party: E*TRADE BANK
06/22/2015 ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO - FOR (Judicial Officer: Div M, Senior Judge )
TO FILE VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR FORECLOSURE.......GRANTED..........06/22/15 ST
Party:
E*TRADE BANK
Date Signed: 06/22/2015
07/07/2015 MOTION FOR DEFAULT
BY JUDICIAL AGAINST MARK A ADAMS AND LISA ADAMS
Party: E*TRADE BANK
07/07/2015 NOTICE OF HEARING
8/18/15 @ 9AM - ROOM 500
08/17/2015 NOTICE OF TELEPHONIC HEARING
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
08/17/2015 RESPONSE
TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR JUDICIAL DEFAULT
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
08/17/2015 MOTION TO QUASH
SUBSTITUTE SERVICE OF PROCESS AND DISMISS THIS ACTION
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
08/17/2015 NOTICE OF TELEPHONIC HEARING
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
08/17/2015 RESPONSE
TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR JUDICIAL DEFAULT
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
08/17/2015 MOTION TO QUASH
SUBSTITUTE SERVICE OF PROCESS AND DISMISS THIS ACTION
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
10/27/2015 NOTICE OF HEARING
12/30/2015 10 AM
12/29/2015 AMENDED
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL DEFAULT
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
12/29/2015 AMENDED MOTION TO - FOR
TO QUASH SUBSTITURE SERVICE OF PROCESS AND DISMISS THIS ACTION
Party: ADAMS, MARK A

4 of 6

2/2/2016 7:29 PM

http://pubrec10.hillsclerk.com/Unsecured/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=2388560

12/29/2015 NOTICE
OF TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE FOR THE HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 12/30/15 @10:00 AM
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
12/29/2015 NOTICE
OF TELEPHONIC APPEARANCE FOR THE HEARING SCHEDULED FOR DECEMBER 30,2015 @ 10:00 AM
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
12/29/2015 AMENDED MOTION TO - FOR
TO QUASH SUBSTITUTE OF PROCESS AND DISMISS THIS ACTION
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
12/29/2015 AMENDED
RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL DEFAULT
Party: ADAMS, LISA S
12/31/2015 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO - FOR (Judicial Officer: Div M, Senior Judge )
JUDICIAL DEFAULT GRANTED.......DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO QUASH SUBSTITTUE SERVICE AND DISMISS ACTION IS
DENIED.....12/30/15 ST
Party:
E*TRADE BANK
Date Signed: 12/30/2015
01/08/2016 NOTICE OF DROPPING PARTY(S)
01/08/2016 MOTION FOR DEFAULT
JUDICIAL
Party: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A
01/12/2016 EVIDENCE DATA SHEET
PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT LIST #12140
01/19/2016 MOTION AND ORDER
FOR DEFAULT
Party: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A
01/20/2016 NOTICE OF FILING
TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING ON JANUARY 21,2015-TRANSCRIPT ATTACHED
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
01/20/2016 NOTICE OF FILING
RELEASE OF MORTGAGE BY WELL FARGO BANK NA-COPY OF RELEASE OF MORTGAGE ATTACHED
Party: ADAMS, MARK A
02/01/2016 NOTICE OF APPEAL
FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Defendant ADAMS, MARK A


Total Financial Assessment
Total Payments and Credits
Balance Due as of 02/02/2016
01/20/2015
01/20/2015
01/20/2016
01/20/2016
02/01/2016
02/01/2016
02/01/2016
02/01/2016

Transaction Assessment
CASH payment
Transaction Assessment
CASH payment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
CASH payment

130.00
130.00
0.00

Receipt # 60-00022266

ADAMS, MARK A

Receipt # 60-00044857

ADAMS, MARK A

Receipt # 60-00045477

ADAMS, MARK A

Plaintiff E*TRADE BANK


Total Financial Assessment
Total Payments and Credits
Balance Due as of 02/02/2016
02/18/2015
02/18/2015
03/16/2015
03/16/2015

Transaction Assessment
ACH Payment
Transaction Assessment
ACH Payment

40.00
40.00
0.00

Receipt # 21-00114603

STEIN , CRAIG BRETT

Receipt # 21-00119396

STEIN , CRAIG BRETT

Plaintiff HMC ASSETS,LLC SOLELY IN ITS CAPACITY AS SEPARATE TRUSTEE OF CAM X TRUST
Total Financial Assessment
Total Payments and Credits
Balance Due as of 02/02/2016
11/10/2009
11/10/2009
11/10/2009
11/10/2009
11/10/2009
11/10/2009
11/10/2009
11/10/2009
11/10/2009
11/17/2009

5 of 6

Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment
Transaction Assessment

3.00
(3.00)
5.00
(5.00)
105.00
5.00
12.00
(122.00)

20.00
(20.00)
20.00
(20.00)

1,005.00
1,005.00
0.00
1.00
0.50
3.50
1.50
3.50
80.00
15.00
685.00
115.00
50.00

2/2/2016 7:29 PM

http://pubrec10.hillsclerk.com/Unsecured/CaseDetail.aspx?CaseID=2388560

11/17/2009
04/16/2010
04/16/2010
08/20/2013
08/20/2013

Mail in payment
Transaction Assessment
Mail in payment
Transaction Assessment
ACH Payment

Receipt # 1701769

BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING LP

Receipt # 1802443

BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING LP

Receipt # 21-00021301

Amelia Berson

(955.00)
30.00
(30.00)
20.00
(20.00)

Unofficial Record

6 of 6

2/2/2016 7:29 PM

Appendix C

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 13THJUDICIAL CIRCUIT,


IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 2009-28773 Div. B
E*TRADE BANK,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MARK A. ADAMS; BUCKHORN PRESERVE
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS, INC.;
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; LlSA S. ADAMS;
UNKNOWN TENANT(S), IN POSSESSION
OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,
Defendants.

NOTICE OF FILING
The Plaintiff, E*TRADE BANK, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, by and
through its undersigned counsel, herein files the Return of Service on LlSA ADAMS and
MARK ADAMS.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sewed by
Electronic Mail on 24th day of March to: Robert L. Tankel, Esquire, Attorney for
Beckhorn Preserve HOA, 1022 Main Street, Suite D, Dunedin, Florida 34698, and
mailed to Mark A. Adams and Lisa S. Adams, 4129 Balington Drive, Valrico, Florida
33594; Wells Fargo Bank, N A., c/o 101 North Phillips Ave, Sioux Falls, SD 57104 and
Current Resident 4129 Balington Drive, Valrico, Florida 33594.
Respectfully submitted,
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
200 SW 1st Avenue, 12th Floor
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301

Stein@kolawyers.com

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT O F STATE


Division of Corporations
March 18, 2015

CRAIG B. STEIN, ESQ.


200 S.W. 1ST AVENUE
SUITE: 1200
FT. LAUDERDALE, FL 33301

Pursuant to Chapter 48.181, Florida Statutes, a copy of the process and initial
pleading, case number 2009-28773, was accepted for MARK ADAMS, and was
filed on March 18, 2015, at 02:OO PM.

E*TRADE BANK,

MARK A. ADAMS; et al.,


THE SECRETARY OF STATE DOES NOT FORWARD DOCUMENTATION TO
THE DEFENDANT.
All inquiries on behalf of the defendant should be made to the attorneys involved.
Yvette McGee
Processor of Service
DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS
Letter No. 715A00005492

Division of Corporations P.O. BOX 6327 -Tallahassee, Florida 32314

Filing #! 24897739 E-Filed 03/16/2015 10:11.12 AM

-:,, ,.

-,:~.
"

>~3
co
-,-

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 13TH JUDICIAL ClRCUl


IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 2009-28773 Div. B

..~

1 :
,-.,,,,

.,

-0
-A-

'0

'

E*TRADE BANK,

*,,.,

cii

'i,.>

Plaintiff,
vs .
MARK A. ADAMS; BUCKHORN PRESERVE
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS, ING.;
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; LISA S. ADAMS;
UNKNOWN TENANT(S), IN POSSESSION
OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,
Defendants.

C,

yfiq:ti,

$3im

m4
I

ALIAS SUMMONS
THE STATE OF FLORIDA:
To Each SherifflCertified Process Server of the State:
YOU ARE COMMANDED to serve this summons and a copy of the Complaint, in
this action on Defendant:
MARK ADAMS
By Serving: Florida Secretary of State
Pursuant to F.S. 48.181
2661 Executive Center Circle, W.
Tallahassee, FL 32399
Each Defendant is required to serve written defenses to the complaint or petition
on CRAIG B. STEIN, ESQUIRE, KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A., 200 S.W. IS'
AVENUE, SUITE 1200, FT. LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33301, within twentv 1201 davs
after service of this summons on that Defendant, exclusive of the date of service, and to
file the original of the defenses with the Clerk of this Court either before service on
Plaintiffs attorney or immediately thereafter. If a Defendant fails to do so, a default will
be entered against that Defendant for the relief demanded in the complaint or petition.
Dated this

day of

MARCH

,2015.

PAT FRANK
As Clerk of the Court

By:
As Deputy Clerk

03/16/2015 1 0 : l l AM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough Countyll3th Judicial Circuit Page 1

lN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE


13TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT. WAND FOR
H~LLSBOROUGHCOUNTY, FLONDA
CIVIL DIVISION
CASE NO.:

69 28773

BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP


FKA COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS
SERVICING, LP,
Plaintiff,

A. ADAMS;
BUCKHORN
PRESERVE
HOMEOWNERS
ASSOCIATION, INC.; WELLS FARGO
BANK, N.A.; LISA S. ADAMS; IN
POSSESSION OF THE
SUBJECT
PROPERTY,
Defendants.
MARK

COMPLAINT

The Plaintiff, BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP FKA COUNTRYWIDE HOME


LOANS SERVICING, LP, sues the Defendants named in the caption hereof and alleges:

COUNT

1.

This is an action to foreclose a mortgage on real property in HILLSBOROUGH County, Florida.

2.

On August 29,2003, MARK A. ADAMS AND LISA S. ADAMS exccuted and delivered a
promissory note and Purchase Money Mortgage securingpayment o f the same to MORTGAGE

Lr,

ELECTRONIC
REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INCORPORATED, AS A NOMWEE FOR
<:.

U3

E-&,
.. .
. i;.

C;j
=

tlxiBblic ~ecordsO~HILLSBOROUEH~cunty,Florida and which rnoegaged the property

INC., which mottgage was recorded in the Official Records Book 13040, Page 245, of

Li..

dpfzibed therein, then owned by and in possession of said mortgagor. Said mortgage was

2
..,-

,$&quently assigned to, BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, L.P.F M A COUNTRYWIDE

C7
.,- !14@ME
LOANS SERVICING, LP. A copy of the note, issignmcnt md mortgage are altached
J -L

.,.,.,c
.<-

1:

.*-

---

u,

, : : ,<

.T

).@e%to and made a pan hereof.


,

,J

. -'T$ntiff is the owner of said note.


4.

Defendant(s), MARK A. ADAMS AND LISA S. ADAMS, om(s) the property.

5.

?here has been a deiiulr under the note and mortgage held by Plai~~tiffin
chat the payment due
January 01, 2009 and all subsequent payments have not been made. Plaintiffdeclares the full
aniounr due under the note and inongage to he now due.

6.

All conditions precedent to the filing of this action has been performed or has occurred.

7.

There is now due, owing and unpaid to the Plaintiff as of the date of the filing ofthis complaint

the following amounts on principal of said note and mortgage: unpaid principal
balance: $167,991.94, plus interest, escrow, title search expenses for ascertaining necessary
parties to this suit, title search, title exam, filing fee, and attorneys fees and costs.
8.

Plaintiff has obligated itself to pay the undersigned attorneys a reasonable fee for their services
herein, Pursuant to the loan documents Plaintiff is entitled to an award of attorneys fees.

9.

Defendants, as UNKNOWN TENANT@), in possession of the subject property, may claim


some interest in or lieu upon the subject pruperty arising fiom being in actual possession of same,
but interest, if any, is subject and inferior to the lien of Plaintiffs mortgage.

10.

The Defendant, WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. may claim some interest in or lienypon the
%'

subject property by virtne of Assignment of Mortgage, which is recorded at ~fic&kkecor$?


r.-,~

'"...

Book 14920, Page 1040 of the Public Records ofHVLSBOROUGH Cuuoky. ~ a -.i d & i., ~, ~ s tI ,j ~ ~ ,

.
.r

,:,. .
The Defendant, BUCKHORN PRESERVE HOMEOWNF,RS ASSOCIATION?p'f2. ;m
:

is subject and inferior to the lien of Plaintiffs mortgage.


I I.

,. :-:.

" 7

---

claim some interest in or lien upon the suhject property by virtue of Any Assess

to FL Statute 720.3085.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffprays as follows:

(a,) That this Court will take jurisdiction of this cause, the suhject matter and the partics hereto.
(h.)

That this Court ascertain and determine the sums of money due and payable to the YlaintifIfrom
the Defendant(s), including withoi~tlimitation principal, interest, advances, attorney fees, and
costs pursuant to the loan documents.

(c.)

That the sum of money found to he due as aforesaid be decreed by this Court to he a lien upon the
lands described in Plaintiffs mortgage.

(d.) That such lien be foreclosed in accordance with the rules and established practice o f this Court,
and upon hilure of the Defendants to pay the amount of money found to be due by them to the
Plaintiff, the said land be sold to satisiy said lien.

(e.)

That this Court decree that the lien of the Plaintiff is superior to any and all right, title or interest
ofthe Defendants herein or any person or parties claiming by, rhrough or under them since the
institution of this suit.

(f)

That all rizht, title or interest of t1:e Defendants or any person claiming by, through 01.under them
be forever barred and foreclosed.

//

,.,.",,
..

'

-.,,,"."

(g.) That this Court grants general relief in this cause as in its discretion might be just and proper
including, but not limited to, a deficiency judgment, except where a discharge is applicable, if the

proceeds of the sale are insufficient to pay Plaintiffs claim.


l a w OfBces of Marshall C.Watson, P.A
1800 N.W. 49nlStreet, Suite 120
Fon Lauderdale, F'L 33309
Tele~hone:(954)453-036s

Green, Esq.

Appendix D

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 13THJUDICIAL CIRCUIT,


IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY. FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 2009-28773 Div. B
EeTRADE BANK,,
Plaintiff,
VS .

MARK A. ADAMS; BUCKHORN PRESERVE


HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS, INC.;
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; LlSA S. ADAMS,
UNKNOWN TENANT(S), IN POSSESSION
OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,
Defendants.

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL DEFAULT


COME NOW, Plantiff, "TRADE BANK, (hereinafter referred as to "Plaintiff') by
and through its undersigned attorney, files this Motion for Judicial Default against
Defendants, MARK A. ADAMS and LlSA ADAMS, (hereinafter referred as to
"Defendants") and as grounds states:
1.

On June 22, 2015, this Court granted the Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to file

Verified Amended Complaint, and deeming it filed as of the entry of the Order

2.

The Defendants response to the Verified Amended Complaint was due on

or before July 3, 2015.


3.

The Defendants' have failed to comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure

1.190(a) as of the date of this Motion for Judicial Default.


4.

Accordingly, Pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.500(b), and

other applicable law, Plaintiff is entitled to entry of judicial default against the
Defendants, MARK A. ADAMS and LlSA ADAMS, for failure to file a responsive
pleading to the Plaintiffs Verified Amended Complaint

CASE NO.: 2009-28773 Div. B


WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, E*TRADE BANK, moves this Court to enter a Judicial
Default against Defendants, MARK A. ADAMS and LISA ADAMS, and provide relief as
the Court deems necessary and proper.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served by
Electronic Mail on 7'h day of July to: Robert L. Tankel, Esquire, Attorney for Beckhorn
Preserve HOA, 1022 Main Street, Suite D, Dunedin, Florida 34698, and mailed to Mark
A. Adams and Lisa S. Adams, 4129 Balington Drive, Valrico, Florida 33594; Wells
Fargo Bank, N.A., c/o 101 North Phillips Ave, Sioux Falls, SD 57104 and Current
Resident 4129 Balington Drive, Valrico, Florida 33594.
Respectfully submitted,

KOPELOWITZ OSTROW
FERGUSON WEISELBERG
Attorneys for Plaintiff
200 SW 1st Avenue, 12th Floor
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301
Telephone No.: (954) 525-4100
Facsimile No.: (954) 525-4300

Fla. Bar No.: 0120464


Stein@kolawvers.com
Alexis Fields
Fla. Bar No.: 95953
Fields@kolawvers.com

Appendix E

IN TEE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JWDICLU CIRCUIT


IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL DIVISION
CASE NO.: 09-CA-028773

E*TRADE BANK,

DMSION: M
Plaintiff,

Defendants.

DEFENDANT MARK A ADAMS' MOTION TO QUASH


SUBSTLTtTTE SERVICE OF PROCESS AND DISMISS THlS ACTION
COMES NOW, the Defendant, MARK A. ADAMS, and files Zzis Motion to Quash

Substitute Service of Process and Dismiss this Action showing:

Almost two years after the undersigned notified new counseI for the new Plaintiff,

CRRZG B. STEIN of KOPELOWITZ OSTROW, P.A., -thatthe original Plaintiffs


predecessor in interest accepted a payment tendered pursuant to an accord in full

satisfaction ofthe note and mortgage at issue in this action, the m t d shows that on

March 1 8,2015, counsel for the Plaintiff attempted to invoke this Coutrt's juridiction
over the Defendants and the property at issue by substitute senice of process p w m t to

Florida Statutes 48.181 by saving Nias Summonses and copies of the C o m p b t on

the Florida Secretary of State. The record also shows that the Plaintiff Bas not Sded
any return receipts showhg service by certified mail on m y Defendant and that no

af'fkhrit of compliance has been filed to date.


2.

"If the plaintiff chooses substituted service on the Secretary of State under Section
48.1 8 1(I), then perfection of such substituted senrice requires full compliance with one

of the alternative methods provided by Section 48,161 ." P.S. R. Associates v. ArtmapHedh, 364 %.2d 855,857 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).

3.

"Because the tack ofpersonal service of process implicates due process concerns, the
plaintiff must strictly comply with the statutory requirements." Smith v. Leamm, 826
50.2d 1077,1078 (Fh2d DCA 2002).

4.

"Section 48.16 1, which allow3 for substituted service of process on a Florida resident
who is concealing his whereabouts, creates an exception to the general rule that the
defendant must be personally m e d , The statute contains three requirements: (1) the

phhtiff must send notice of service and a copy of the process by registered or

certified mail to the defendant; (2) the plaintiff mugt file the defendmi's return

receipt; and (3) the plaintiff must file m affidavit of wmplimce."Id. (Emphasis
added.)
5.

"The court cannot pmeed in a matter until proper proof of valid service is made." Reemployment Sewices, Lbd. v. National Loan Acquisition Company, 969 S0.2d 467,47 1 (

Fb.5th DCA 2007) citing fixenski v. f l ~ k r t y 1, 11 6 So.2d 767,768-69 (Ha.1 959) and
Hemy P.Trawick, Jr., Horiab Practice and Procedure, 4 8:20 (2007 ed.). When the

record shows defective service of process, the court does not have jurisdiction to proceed.

id.
6.

A judge should take notice of facts which show a lack of jurisdiction, and when a judge
acts witbout jurisdiction, the judge proceeds at his or her peril a d is personally liable for

the h g e s flowing fmm such acts. Fmisk v. Smuot, 58 So2d 534,53 7-538 ma.
1952).

As the recod shows that no return receipts and no affidavit of compliance have been

7.

fiIed by the Plaintiff to date, the Plaintiffs attempt to invoke this Court's jurisdiction

over the Defendants and the property at issue by substime service on the Florida
Secretsry of State should be quashed.

Furthermore, as the Plaintiff has failed to take the mandatory steps to perfect service after

8.

this Court has g a n d it two atensions of t h e to do so, this action should be dismissed.
WEEREFOlXF+the Defendant, MARK A, ADAMS, respectfully requests that this
Honorable Court take notice that it does not have jurisdiction over the property at issue and does
not have jurisdiction over .the Defendants, MARK. A. ADAMS and LISA S. ADAMS,quash the

Plaintiffs m p t at substitute service of process, and dismiss this action.

CERTZETCATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a copy hereof was sewed by facsimile and US.Mail t~

counsel fur the Plaintiff and its servicer,CRAIG B. STEIN of KOPELOWTZ OSTROW, P.A.,
at 200 S.W. 1st Avenue, Suite 1200, Ft. Lauderdde, FL 33301; facsimile number 954-525-4300;

by U.S. Mail to counsel for the Defendant, BUCKHORN PRESERVE HOMEOWNERS


ASSOCIATION, INC., ROBERT A. TANKEL of ROBERT A. TANKEL, P.A., at 1022 Main
Street, Suite D; Dunedin, FL 34698; and by hand delivery to the Defendant, LISA S. A W S ,

&&

onthis

17 ~ y o f ~ ~ g u s t , 2 0 1 5 .

Mark A. Adams JDIMBA


4129 BaGngton Drive

Valrico, FL 33596
Telephone: 813-6534350

Appendix F

Filing # 33730886 E-Filed 10/27/2015 02:29:52 PM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 1 3 JUDICIAL


~ ~
CIRCUIT,
IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO.: 2009-28773 Div. M
E*TRADE BANK,
OTATF OF FLORIDA

Plaintiff,

COUP" QaaF HlLLE',aQROkdB?Hj


THIS 18 TO CFETmrIF"Y THhY THE FOREGOING 18 A TRUE
AND CORREGT GCCfS\I QF TWpI WSU*P%I-C' Ot! FBbE &"","

vs,
MARK A. ADAMS; BUCKHORN PRESERVE
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS, INC.;
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; LISA S. ADAMS;
UNKNOWN TENANT(S), IN POSSESSION
OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,

Defendants.

NOTICE OF SPECIAL SET HEARING


(I
Hour Special Set)
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned will call up for hearing in the above-

styled case the following:


PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR JUDICIAL DEFAULT and
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO QUASH SUBSTITUTE SERVICE & DISMISS ACTION
DATE:

Wednesday, December 30,201 5

TIME:

10:OO a.m.

JUDGE:

Presiding Judge

PLACE:

George Edgecomb Courthouse


800 E. Twiggs St.
Courtroom 500
Tampa, FL 33602

WE HEREBY CERTIFY that prior to noticing this hearing the undersigned has
made a good faith effort to resolve the foregoing issues with opposing counsel.
If you are a person with a disability who needs any accommodation in order
to participate in this proceeding, you are entitled, at no cost to you, to the provision
of certain assistance. Please contact the Court Administrators ADA Coordinator
within two (2) working days of your receipt of this notice. Ifyou are hearing or voice
impaired, call the Florida Relay Service at (800) 955-8711 (TTY), or (800) 955-8770
(Voice).

10/27/2015 2:29 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County113th Judicial Circuit Page 1

CASE NO.: 2009-28773 Div. M

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served by
Electronic Mail on 27thday of October, 2015 to: Robert 1. Tankel, Esquire, Attorney for

Beckhorn Preserve HOA, 1022 Main Street, Suite D, Dunedin, Florida 34698,

pieadinqs@condocollections.corr., and by Mailed to: Mark A. Adarns and Lisa S. Adarns,

4129 Balington Drive, Valrico, Florida 33596; Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., c/o 701 North
t

Phillips Ave, Sioux Falls, SD 57104 and Current Resident 41 29 Balington Drive, Valrico,

Florida 33596.
RespectFully submitted,
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW
FERGUSON WEISELBERG GILBERT, ?.A.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
200 SW 1st Avenue, 12th Floor
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301

By:

CRAIG
B'ETT STEIN
I
la, B& No.: 0420464

s~~n@kolawyers,com
/ALEXIS FIELDS
Fla. Bar No.: 95953
fields@,koIawvers.com

1012712015 2:29 PM Electronically Filed: Hillsborough County113th Judicial Circuit Page 2

Appendix G

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TKE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT


IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL DIVISION

CASE NO.:09-CA-028773
DIVISION: M

E*TMDE BANK,

Plaintiff,
v.
MARK A. ADAMS et al.,

Defendants.

DEJ!ENDANT MARK A. ADAMS-NDED


MUTTON TO QUASH
SUBSTITUTE SERVICE OF PWCESS GNI) DISMISS l X l S ACTION
COMES NOW, the Defendant, MARK A. ADAMS, and files his Amended Motion to
Quash Substitute Service ofPmess and Dismiss tkis Action showing:
1.

Almost two years after the undersigned notified new counsel for the new Plaintiff,
CRAIG B.STEIN of KOPELOWTZ OSTROW, PA.,that the original Plaintiffs

predecessor in interest accepted a payment tendered pursuant to an accord infull

satisfaction of the note and mortgage at issue in this action, and therefore, that this action
is a frivolous attempt to collect a non-existent debt, the record shows that on March 18,

2015, counsel for the Plaintiff attempted to invoke this Court's jurisdiction over the
Defendants and the property at issue by substitute senrice of process pursuant to Florida
Statutes 4 48.18 1 by sewing Alias S u m m o m and copies of the Complaint on the

Florida Secretary of State.


2.

However, the record shows that no return receipts and no affidavit of compliance have
been filed by the Plaintiff to date and that the original Complaint which was served on the

Florida Secretary of State does not contain the jurisdictional allegations necessary to

constitute the Secretary of State as agent for substituted service of process, and therefore,
the Plaintiff has failed in its aztempt to invoke this Court's jurisdiction over the

Defendants and the property at issue by substitute service on the Florida Secretary of
State and the motion to quash should be granted for the reasons shown i n k

3.

"The court cannot proceed in a m a t h until proper proof of valid service is made." Reemp!oyment Services, Dd. v. National Lorn Acqtcifl'tionCompny, 969 So.2d 467,47 1

(Fla. 5th DCA 2007) citing KEosemki v- Hahero, 116 So.2d767,768-69(Fla.1959) and
Henry P. Trawick, Jr., Florih Practice and Procedure, $8:20 (2007 ed.). When the
record shows defective d c e of process, the court does nut have jurisdiction to proceed.

Id.
4.

"Becam the lack ofp a s o d service of process implicates due process concerns, the
plaintiff must strictly m p l y with the statutory requirements." Smith v. Leamapa, 826

So.2d 1077,1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002).


5.

A judge should take notice offacts which show a lack of jurisdiction, and when njudge

acts without jurisdiction, the judge p r o d s at his or her peril and is personally liable for
the damages flowing from such acts. Fdsk v. Snoot, 58 So.2d 534,537-538 (Fla.
1952).

6.

"To support substituted service of process on a defendant, the complaint must allege the
jurisdictional requirements prescribed by statute. If it failsto do so, then a motion to

quash process and service of process should be granted."Drah v. &hwIm, 353 So.2d
%1,964 PIEL
2d DCA 1978) citing Esberger v. First Florida Business Cu12sdtmts, Inc.,

338 So.2d 561 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976) and HmchelSteinau Company v. Hany Schorr,

Inc., 302 So.2d 198 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). See also, Alvarado v. Cisneros, 919 So2d 5 85

(FIa. 3d DCA 2006) and Ferguson v. Mc William,483 So.2d 509 (Fk 4th DCA 1986).

7.

Filing an amended complaint and delivering it to the defendants after sewing: a complaint
without the required jurisdictional allegations on the Florida Secretary of State does NOT

coda jurisdiction. See, e.g., Drake at 964.


8.

The record shows that the Amended Complaint was not filed until May 11,2015, nearly

two months after service of the original Complaint on the Secretary of State, and that the
Amended Complaint has not been served on the Florida Secretary of State. Moreover,
the record shows that the original Complaint which was served on the Florida Secretary

of State does not contain the jurisdictional allegations necessary to constitute the

Secretary of State as agent for substituted senice of process. Therefore, the Plaintiff has

failed in its attempt to invoke this Court's jurisdiction over the Defendants and the
property at issue by substitute service on the Florida Secretary of State, and this motion to

quash should be granted because the Court does not have jurisdiction over the Defendants
or the property at issue in this frivofous attempt to collect a non-existent debt,

9.

Moreever, even if the Plaintiff had served the Amended Complaint with the required
jurisdictional allegations on the Florida Secretary of State, it has still failed to take the

actions necessary to invoke this Court" jjuridiction over the Defendants and the property
at issue as shown i n h

10.

"If the plaintiff chooses substituted service on the Secretary of State under Section
48.1 8 1(I), then perfection of mch substituted service requires full compliance with one

of the dternative methods provided by Section 48.161 ." P.S. R Assmiares v. ArtmMHeath, 364 So.2d 855,857 CfiJsl. 2d DCA 1978).

11.

"Section 48.161, which allows for substituted service of process on a Florida resident

who is concealing his whereabouts, mates an exception to the general rule that the

defendant must be personalty served. The statute contains three requimmenta: (1) the
phintiff mast send notice of service and a copy of the p m ~ bys registered or

certified mail to the defendmG (2) the plaintiff must file the defendant's return

receipt; and (3) the plaintiff must file an affidavit of compliance."Smith v. haman,
826 So.2d 1077,1078 Fla. 2d DCA 2002). (Emphasis added)
12.

However, the record shows that the Plaintiff has not fded any return receipts showing
service by certified mail on any Defendant and h t no affidavit of compliance has been

filed to date, and therefore, as proper proof of valid senrice has NOT been made, this
Court does NOT have jurisdiction aver the Defendants or the property at issue and the

motion to quash should be granted.

13.

As the record shows that no re-

receipts and no affidavit of compliance have been

filed by the Plaintiff to date and that the original Complaint which was served on the
Florida Secretary of State does not contain the jurisdictional allegations nwessary to

constitute the Secretary of State as agent for substituted service of process, the Plaintiff

has failed in its attempt to invoke this Cowt's jwisdiciion over the Defendants and the
pmperty at issue by substitute service on the Florida Secretary of State and this motion to

quash should be granted.


14.

Furthermore, as the Plaintiff has failed to take the mandatory steps to perfect senice after
this Court kas granted it two extensions of time to do so, this action should be dismissed.

WH.=M)RE, the Defendant, MARK A. A D A M S , respwthdly requests that this

Honorable Court take notice that it does not have jurisdiction over the property at issue and does
not h v e jurisdiction over the Defendants, quash the Plaintiffs afAempt at substitute service of
process, and dismiss this action.

CERTXFXCAm OF SERVICE

The undersigned d e s that a copy hereof was served by facsimile and U.S. Mail to
counsel for the Plaintiff and its serviw, C M G B. STEJN of KOPELOWITZ OSTROW, PA.,

at 200 S W. 1st Avenue, Suite 1200, Ft.huderdale, FL 33 301 ;facsimile number 954-525-4300;

by U.S. Rlail to counsel far the Defendant, BUCKHORN PRESERVE HOMEOWNERS


ASSOCIATION, INC., ROBERT A. T m L of ROBERT A. TANKEL, P.A., at 1022 Main
Street, Suite D;Dunedin, FL 34698; and by band delivery to the Defendant, LISA S. A D A M S ,
<
?:
on this 9
,-

.,--b63

day of December, 2015.


A

4129 Balington Drive


Valrico, FL 33596
Telephone: 8 1 3-653-4350