Preview
Filing # 86475790 E-Filed 03/15/2019 03:23:48 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA
DITECH FINANCIAL LLC F/K/A GREEN
TREE SERVICING LLC,
CASE NUMBER: 2019-CA-000153
Plaintiff
vs.
JEFFREY W. JACOBS, et al.,
Defendant.
/
MOTION TO VACATE ORDER OF CLERKS DEFAULT AND MOTION TO
CONTINUE TRIAL
COMES NOW, the Defendants’ JEFFREY W. JACOBS and MELODIE JACOBS,
(DEFENDANTS?) through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil
Procedure 1.540(b) moves this court for entry of an Order Vacating the Clerks Default and
CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL in support states:
1 On January 15, 2019 Plaintiff initiated this action to foreclose on residential property
owned by the DEFENDANTS’.
On January 23, 2019 DEFENDANTS? retained the Law Office of Paul A. Krakser,
P.A. to defend the foreclosure action and work on loss mitigation (see attached Exhibit
“A”),
Due to some unknown reason the Notice of Appearance and Motion for Extension of
Time to Serve Response to Complaint was prepared, placed in the client’s electronic
file, but not filed with the Court (see attached Exhibit “B”).
On February 26, 2019 upon Plaintiffs Motion for Default the Clerk of Court defaulted
DEFENDANTS’.
On March 1, 2019 Plaintiff noticed this case ready for trial.
On March 4, 2019 the mistake was discovered and a Notice of Appearance was filed
with the Court.
On March 15, 2019 DEFENDANTS?’ through counsel submitted a completed loss
mitigation package to Plaintiff.
This case is less than ninety (90) days old and the default entered on day 22. Florida
courts have a preference for deciding cases on the merits of the claims rather than on a
technicality. J.J.K. Int’l, Inc. v. Shivbaran, 985 So. 2d 66, 69 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).
Due to the DEFENDANTS? desire to retain the property and in light of the submitted
loss mitigation package and the age of this case it would not be appropriate to rush to
trial when settlement options can still be explored.
10. Under rule 1.540(b), which provides in relevant part: (b) Mistakes; Inadvertence;
Excusable Neglect; Newly Discovered Evidence; Fraud; etc. On motion and upon such
terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or a party's legal representative from a
final judgment, decree, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake,
inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.
11 Rule 1.540(b)(1) “ ‘envisions an honest mistake made during the regular course of
litigation, including those that result from oversight, neglect, or accident.’ ” Ocwen
Loan Servicing, 185 So.3d at 629 (quoting Paladin Props. v. Family Inv. Enters., 952
So.2d 560, 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).
12 “Excusable neglect is found ‘where inaction results from clerical or secretarial error,
reasonable misunderstanding, a system gone awry or any other of the foibles to which
human nature is heir.’ ” Elliott v. Aurora Loan Servs. LLC, 31 So.3d 304, 307 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2010) (quoting Somero v. Hendry Gen. Hosp., 467 So.2d 1103, 1106 (Fla. 4th
DCA 1985)).
13 In order for the court to grant a motion to set aside a default judgment, the moving party
is required to show the trial court three things: (1) the party’s failure to file a responsive
pleading was due to excusable neglect; (2) the movant has a meritorious defense to the
underlying action; and (3) the moving party acted “with due diligence in seeking relief
from the default.” Lazcare Int'l v. Caraballo, 957 So. 2d 1191, 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA
2007).
14 DEFENDANTS?’ has met all required elements under Florida case law to vacate the
default and trial order by demonstrating excusable neglect and meritorious defense by
filing the answer and affirmative defenses (Exhibit “C”) and due diligence by bringing
this motion timely.
WHEREFORE, DEFENDANTS, respectfully request this Court to vacate the default
against them and allow time for Defendant to continue defend this action and/or explore possible
settlement with Plaintiff and award any other entitlement this Court deems appropriate.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing is being furnished on
March 15, 2019 via E-Mail to:
Robertson, Anshutz & Schneid, P.L
6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100
Boca Raton, FL 33487
Email@rasflaw.com
The Law Office of Paul A. Krasker, P.A.
1615 Forum Place, 5“ Floor
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Telephone: (561) 801-7944
Facsimile: (561) 515-2939
Primary E-mail: Kengvalson@kraskerlaw.com
Secondary E-mail: serviceHAD@kraskerlaw.com
BY:_ {4 2 O72,
Kinley I. Engvalson, Esq.
Florida Bar No.: 332399
THE LAW OFFICE OF
PAUL A. KRASKER, P.A.
1615 FORUM PLACE 5" FLOOR
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401
MAIN (561) 515-2930
FACSIMILE (561) 328-2260
Representation Agreement
January 23, 2019
Client: Melodie & Jeffrey Jacobs
Address: 4899 Sparrow Drive
Saint Cloud FL 34772
Dear: Melodie & Jeffrey Jacobs
You have asked this firm to provide you (referred to herein as “Client”) with Foreclosure
Defense/Modification legal representation specifically related to case number 2019-CA-000153,
located at: 4899 Sparrow Drive Saint Cloud FL 34772(Hereinafter referred to as the “Matter”),
and we are pleased to do so.
eee
i
°C
Exwts) “M
Please confirm our agreement as set forth in the enclosed Standards and this Representation
Agreement by signing below, initialing each page, and returning a copy to us by mail, facsimile or
e-mail.
By: Vile b/ By
Date Signed: 01/23/2019 Date Signed:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA
DITECH FINANCIAL LLC F/K/A GREEN
TREE SERVICING LLC,
CASE NUMBER: 2019-CA-000153
Plaintiff
VS.
JEFFREY W. JACOBS, et al.,
Defendant.
/
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO VACATE ORDER OF CLERKS
DEFAULT AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF LEON
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared DAVID WAITE, who
being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
1 My name is DAVID WAITE, and am personally competent and of sound mind to make
this affidavit. Furthermore I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein.
This file was assigned to my and a loss mitigation specialist.
On March 4, 2019 while reviewing the file and docket, I realized that the Notice of
Appearance and Motion for Extension of Time (documents) that was drafted, placed in the
file but was not filed with the Court.
limmediately drafted a new Notice of Appearance and with approval filed with the Clerk
of Court (docket entry number 25).
I have been unable to determine why the documents were not filed with the Clerk of Court
at the time of drafting.
Page 1 2018-CA-003366-O
ey Wels} “AH
6. Due to this mistake I added another “check” to the system to prevent this mistake from
occurring in the future.
JURAT PAGE
State of \ lorsdy
County of { Cater Goth
The foregoing instrument was sworn and acknowledged before me this 15" day of March
2019, by David waite who is personally known to me.
/
SS
<
Signature: {
DAVID W. AITE,
Print: Oar) Wale
be ec
LE Mf Lp
‘ary Public
CfY
/
Ze “ (Name of Nota ry, typed, printed or stamped)
Commission No.
JEWEL WHIGHAM ~
MY COMMISSION @ FF248018,
EXPIRES June 29, 2019
gor) 388.0189,
Page 2 2018-CA-003366-O
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA
DITECH FINANCIAL LLC F/K/A GREEN
TREE SERVICING LLC,
CASE NUMBER: 2019-CA-000153
Plaintiff
vs.
JEFFREY W. JACOBS, et al.,
Defendant.
/
DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT
Defendants’ JEFFREY W. JACOBS and MELODIE JACOBS, by and through
undersigned counsel, hereby files their Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Plaintiffs
Amended Complaint and would state as follows:
L_ANSWER
Admitted solely for purposes of jurisdiction.
Admitted solely for purposes of jurisdiction.
Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
Denied
Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
Denied.
Edi) “C"
Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
10 Admitted.
I Denied.
12. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
13 Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
14 Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
15 Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
16 Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof.
I. DEFENDANT’S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff has offered no evidence to prove costs and payments showing that Plaintiff
paid for taxes, insurance, attorney fees, and all other costs and expenses claimed by the Plaintiff.
Defendant demands a full accounting and strict proof of all sums Plaintiff seeks in the form of a
monetary judgment against the Defendant, including payments including but not limited to a title
search expense, advanced ad valorem taxes, premiums on insurance, attorney’s fees and other
necessary costs.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff lacks standing to bring the subject action. The Plaintiff is not the owner or holder
of the promissory Note attached to the Complaint. The Promissory Note in this action identifies
someone other than the plaintiff as being the lender, and neither the Note nor the Mortgage in
this action contains any assignment and/or endorsement naming the Plaintiff as the successor in
interest under the note. Therefore, the Plaintiff lacks standing to prosecute this foreclosure
action.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Plaintiff has failed to comply with conditions precedent. Specifically, the Mortgage
attached to the Complaint at Paragraph 22 specifies that prior to acceleration the lender must
give the borrower a thirty (30) day notice setting forth the default, the action required to cure the
default, a date not less than thirty days from the date the notice is given, by which the default
must be cured, and notice that the failure to cure the default on or before the date specified In the
notice may result in acceleration and foreclosure. Paragraph 22 of the Mortgage is a very specific
condition precedent to acceleration and foreclosure which is not satisfied by a blanket allegation
by the Plaintiff that all conditions precedent have been fulfilled or have occurred. Plaintiff has
failed to prove that an acceleration letter by the proper party was sent to the correct address.
Defendant denies receiving any notice from the Plaintiff or its agents regarding acceleration,
amounts due, and how to cure.
WHEREFORE, Defendants’ JEFFREY W. JACOBS and MELODIE JACOBS,
respectfully request this Honorable Court to dismiss the Complaint filed herein and award
Defendants’ attorney’s fees and costs together with such further relief this Court deems equitable
and just.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing is being furnished on
March 15, 2019 via E-Mail to:
Robertson, Anshutz & Schneid, P.L.
6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100
Boca Raton, FL 33487
Email@rasflaw.com
The Law Office of Paul A. Krasker, P.A.
1615 Forum Place, 5” Floor
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Telephone: (561) 801-7944
Facsimile: (561) 515-2939
serviceHAD@kraskerlaw.com
Kengvalson@kraskerlaw.com
dwaite@kraskerlaw.com
BY:_/s a
Kinley I. Engvalson, Esq.
Florida Bar No.: 332399
Preview
Filing # 86475790 E-Filed 03/15/2019 03:23:48 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA DITECH FINANCIAL LLC F/K/A GREEN TREE SERVICING LLC, CASE NUMBER: 2019-CA-000153 Plaintiff vs. JEFFREY W. JACOBS, et al., Defendant. / MOTION TO VACATE ORDER OF CLERKS DEFAULT AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL COMES NOW, the Defendants’ JEFFREY W. JACOBS and MELODIE JACOBS, (DEFENDANTS?) through her undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) moves this court for entry of an Order Vacating the Clerks Default and CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL in support states: 1 On January 15, 2019 Plaintiff initiated this action to foreclose on residential property owned by the DEFENDANTS’. On January 23, 2019 DEFENDANTS? retained the Law Office of Paul A. Krakser, P.A. to defend the foreclosure action and work on loss mitigation (see attached Exhibit “A”), Due to some unknown reason the Notice of Appearance and Motion for Extension of Time to Serve Response to Complaint was prepared, placed in the client’s electronic file, but not filed with the Court (see attached Exhibit “B”). On February 26, 2019 upon Plaintiffs Motion for Default the Clerk of Court defaulted DEFENDANTS’. On March 1, 2019 Plaintiff noticed this case ready for trial. On March 4, 2019 the mistake was discovered and a Notice of Appearance was filed with the Court. On March 15, 2019 DEFENDANTS?’ through counsel submitted a completed loss mitigation package to Plaintiff. This case is less than ninety (90) days old and the default entered on day 22. Florida courts have a preference for deciding cases on the merits of the claims rather than on a technicality. J.J.K. Int’l, Inc. v. Shivbaran, 985 So. 2d 66, 69 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). Due to the DEFENDANTS? desire to retain the property and in light of the submitted loss mitigation package and the age of this case it would not be appropriate to rush to trial when settlement options can still be explored. 10. Under rule 1.540(b), which provides in relevant part: (b) Mistakes; Inadvertence; Excusable Neglect; Newly Discovered Evidence; Fraud; etc. On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or a party's legal representative from a final judgment, decree, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. 11 Rule 1.540(b)(1) “ ‘envisions an honest mistake made during the regular course of litigation, including those that result from oversight, neglect, or accident.’ ” Ocwen Loan Servicing, 185 So.3d at 629 (quoting Paladin Props. v. Family Inv. Enters., 952 So.2d 560, 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). 12 “Excusable neglect is found ‘where inaction results from clerical or secretarial error, reasonable misunderstanding, a system gone awry or any other of the foibles to which human nature is heir.’ ” Elliott v. Aurora Loan Servs. LLC, 31 So.3d 304, 307 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (quoting Somero v. Hendry Gen. Hosp., 467 So.2d 1103, 1106 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)). 13 In order for the court to grant a motion to set aside a default judgment, the moving party is required to show the trial court three things: (1) the party’s failure to file a responsive pleading was due to excusable neglect; (2) the movant has a meritorious defense to the underlying action; and (3) the moving party acted “with due diligence in seeking relief from the default.” Lazcare Int'l v. Caraballo, 957 So. 2d 1191, 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). 14 DEFENDANTS?’ has met all required elements under Florida case law to vacate the default and trial order by demonstrating excusable neglect and meritorious defense by filing the answer and affirmative defenses (Exhibit “C”) and due diligence by bringing this motion timely. WHEREFORE, DEFENDANTS, respectfully request this Court to vacate the default against them and allow time for Defendant to continue defend this action and/or explore possible settlement with Plaintiff and award any other entitlement this Court deems appropriate. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing is being furnished on March 15, 2019 via E-Mail to: Robertson, Anshutz & Schneid, P.L 6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100 Boca Raton, FL 33487 Email@rasflaw.com The Law Office of Paul A. Krasker, P.A. 1615 Forum Place, 5“ Floor West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: (561) 801-7944 Facsimile: (561) 515-2939 Primary E-mail: Kengvalson@kraskerlaw.com Secondary E-mail: serviceHAD@kraskerlaw.com BY:_ {4 2 O72, Kinley I. Engvalson, Esq. Florida Bar No.: 332399 THE LAW OFFICE OF PAUL A. KRASKER, P.A. 1615 FORUM PLACE 5" FLOOR WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 MAIN (561) 515-2930 FACSIMILE (561) 328-2260 Representation Agreement January 23, 2019 Client: Melodie & Jeffrey Jacobs Address: 4899 Sparrow Drive Saint Cloud FL 34772 Dear: Melodie & Jeffrey Jacobs You have asked this firm to provide you (referred to herein as “Client”) with Foreclosure Defense/Modification legal representation specifically related to case number 2019-CA-000153, located at: 4899 Sparrow Drive Saint Cloud FL 34772(Hereinafter referred to as the “Matter”), and we are pleased to do so. eee i °C Exwts) “M Please confirm our agreement as set forth in the enclosed Standards and this Representation Agreement by signing below, initialing each page, and returning a copy to us by mail, facsimile or e-mail. By: Vile b/ By Date Signed: 01/23/2019 Date Signed: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA DITECH FINANCIAL LLC F/K/A GREEN TREE SERVICING LLC, CASE NUMBER: 2019-CA-000153 Plaintiff VS. JEFFREY W. JACOBS, et al., Defendant. / AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO VACATE ORDER OF CLERKS DEFAULT AND MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF LEON BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared DAVID WAITE, who being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 1 My name is DAVID WAITE, and am personally competent and of sound mind to make this affidavit. Furthermore I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth herein. This file was assigned to my and a loss mitigation specialist. On March 4, 2019 while reviewing the file and docket, I realized that the Notice of Appearance and Motion for Extension of Time (documents) that was drafted, placed in the file but was not filed with the Court. limmediately drafted a new Notice of Appearance and with approval filed with the Clerk of Court (docket entry number 25). I have been unable to determine why the documents were not filed with the Clerk of Court at the time of drafting. Page 1 2018-CA-003366-O ey Wels} “AH 6. Due to this mistake I added another “check” to the system to prevent this mistake from occurring in the future. JURAT PAGE State of \ lorsdy County of { Cater Goth The foregoing instrument was sworn and acknowledged before me this 15" day of March 2019, by David waite who is personally known to me. / SS < Signature: { DAVID W. AITE, Print: Oar) Wale be ec LE Mf Lp ‘ary Public CfY / Ze “ (Name of Nota ry, typed, printed or stamped) Commission No. JEWEL WHIGHAM ~ MY COMMISSION @ FF248018, EXPIRES June 29, 2019 gor) 388.0189, Page 2 2018-CA-003366-O IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR OSCEOLA COUNTY, FLORIDA DITECH FINANCIAL LLC F/K/A GREEN TREE SERVICING LLC, CASE NUMBER: 2019-CA-000153 Plaintiff vs. JEFFREY W. JACOBS, et al., Defendant. / DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT Defendants’ JEFFREY W. JACOBS and MELODIE JACOBS, by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files their Answer and Affirmative Defenses to the Plaintiffs Amended Complaint and would state as follows: L_ANSWER Admitted solely for purposes of jurisdiction. Admitted solely for purposes of jurisdiction. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. Denied Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. Denied. Edi) “C" Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. 10 Admitted. I Denied. 12. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. 13 Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. 14 Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. 15 Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. 16 Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the allegations and therefore denies the allegations and demands strict proof thereof. I. DEFENDANT’S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff has offered no evidence to prove costs and payments showing that Plaintiff paid for taxes, insurance, attorney fees, and all other costs and expenses claimed by the Plaintiff. Defendant demands a full accounting and strict proof of all sums Plaintiff seeks in the form of a monetary judgment against the Defendant, including payments including but not limited to a title search expense, advanced ad valorem taxes, premiums on insurance, attorney’s fees and other necessary costs. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff lacks standing to bring the subject action. The Plaintiff is not the owner or holder of the promissory Note attached to the Complaint. The Promissory Note in this action identifies someone other than the plaintiff as being the lender, and neither the Note nor the Mortgage in this action contains any assignment and/or endorsement naming the Plaintiff as the successor in interest under the note. Therefore, the Plaintiff lacks standing to prosecute this foreclosure action. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Plaintiff has failed to comply with conditions precedent. Specifically, the Mortgage attached to the Complaint at Paragraph 22 specifies that prior to acceleration the lender must give the borrower a thirty (30) day notice setting forth the default, the action required to cure the default, a date not less than thirty days from the date the notice is given, by which the default must be cured, and notice that the failure to cure the default on or before the date specified In the notice may result in acceleration and foreclosure. Paragraph 22 of the Mortgage is a very specific condition precedent to acceleration and foreclosure which is not satisfied by a blanket allegation by the Plaintiff that all conditions precedent have been fulfilled or have occurred. Plaintiff has failed to prove that an acceleration letter by the proper party was sent to the correct address. Defendant denies receiving any notice from the Plaintiff or its agents regarding acceleration, amounts due, and how to cure. WHEREFORE, Defendants’ JEFFREY W. JACOBS and MELODIE JACOBS, respectfully request this Honorable Court to dismiss the Complaint filed herein and award Defendants’ attorney’s fees and costs together with such further relief this Court deems equitable and just. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing is being furnished on March 15, 2019 via E-Mail to: Robertson, Anshutz & Schneid, P.L. 6409 Congress Ave., Suite 100 Boca Raton, FL 33487 Email@rasflaw.com The Law Office of Paul A. Krasker, P.A. 1615 Forum Place, 5” Floor West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Telephone: (561) 801-7944 Facsimile: (561) 515-2939 serviceHAD@kraskerlaw.com Kengvalson@kraskerlaw.com dwaite@kraskerlaw.com BY:_/s a Kinley I. Engvalson, Esq. Florida Bar No.: 332399