Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2013

Abujasen v. Dreke

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided July 10, 2013 · Cortinas, Emas, Logue

118 So. 3d 235; 2013 WL 3455741; 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 10988 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Charry v. in Re: Torres v. Gonzalez (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
Charry v. Torres (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
Charry v. Torres (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2019)
Lmg Nw 173 Dr LLC v. Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

EMAS, J.

Maria Elena Abujasen appeals an order denying her motion to intervene, which was filed after the trial court’s entry of a final judgment of foreclosure, and after a sale of the foreclosed property. Given (1) our standard of review in this case1;(2) the general rule that intervention is not permitted post-final judgment2; and (3) the absence of a transcript of the hearing below3, we affirm the trial court’s order.

In doing so, however, we note Appellees candidly conceded, both in their brief and at oral argument, that because Appellant was a nonparty to the action, the final judgment in this case does not affect any ownership interest Appellant may have in the foreclosed property.

Affirmed.

.See Barnhill v. Fla. Microsoft Anti-Trust Litigation, 905 So.2d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (order on motion to intervene is reviewed under abuse of discretion standard).

. See Dickinson v. Segal, 219 So.2d 435 (Fla. 1969).

. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 1979).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.