Debt Articles Lawsuits Legal Related

Strategy on How to Defeat A Motion For Summary Judgment In Florida Specifically and Other States Generally

Written by Guest Post

The premise behind a Summary Judgment (SJ) is that the facts are undisputed, and that the only remaining question is one of law. When a plaintiff files a motion for SJ they are going for the quick victory with minimal costs. Defeat the SJ and the plaintiff is in for a long war with greatly increased costs.

The strategy for defeating the plaintiffs SJ motion is to strike the evidence the plaintiff attaches to his motion to show that there are no facts in dispute. If you succeed in doing this, then the facts are in dispute and the matter is not ripe for SJ.

The evidence attached to the SJ Motion must be supported by notarized affidavits. If the notarized affidavits are missing or defective, the evidence can be struck by a Motion to Strike by the defendant. Generally there will be a notarized affidavit by a custodian or assistant custodian of records (Affiant) personally attesting to the methods and business practices of the plaintiff, stating that the affiant has personally inspected the business records for the defendants account, and stating the amount due. (see the attached Amex affidavit filed in a Florida lawsuit).

Each state has their own notarization laws. If the case was filed in your state and the affidavit was notarized in another state, you must review your states notarization laws to see if the out of State notarization complies with your states requirements. If it does not, you can strike the affidavit by a motion to strike.

FLORIDA has unique notarization requirements and unless the out of state notarization uses the Florida notarization form, it will not comply with Florida’s law. (see the attached Florida case documents). I have yet to see an out of state notarization use the required Florida form in a Florida SJ motion.

Florida’s notarization statute ( Chapter X, 117.05) requires the notary to state that either the affiant is personally known to the notary or that the notary examined the affiants ID to confirm their identity and to list the ID that was examined. In the Amex affidavit the notary merely stated the affiant personally appeared.

Further examination of the Amex affidavit revealed the assistant custodian of records Hartje purported to be “attorney in fact.” “An attorney in fact” is someone authorized to perform a task under a power of attorney. A copy of the power of attorney she was operating under should have been attached. It was not. This raised another issue of fact. Any affidavit attached to a SJ motion under which someone claims to be acting as an “attorney in fact” can be attacked if the power of attorney is not also attached. The defendants motion to strike the affidavits should be submitted at the deadline for submission so that the plaintiff does not have an opportunity to correct any defective affidavit.

See also  Judgments Tossed Out Against Debtors in New York. Law Firms and Debt Collectors Sued.

A copy of the credit card statements or the records of the defendants account should also be attached to the SJ motion in Florida. Under Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.510 these records must be sworn to or certified by a Notary. These records almost never are. However this objection should be made at the SJ motion hearing itself so the Plaintiffs don’t have a chance to correct this. Many states have similar laws regarding business records used in a summary judgment. Be sure to research the laws in your state.

This article was written by Robert Harmon. Mr. Harmon is lawyer who graduated from University Miami Law School. He serves as a Self Help Law consultant. His consulting services include informing clients how an attorney would approach and research a problem, giving them the most efficient search terms for use in internet research of the law, and reviewing the clients work product for concise and efficient presentation of their case. He can be reached through his website This article was merely informational and is not intended as legal advice.

If you would like to contribute a guest post, click here.

About the author

Guest Post

If you would like to contribute a guest post, click here.


  • Thx Robert for some practical advice on an issue consumers see daily. I would add that in addition to a motion to strike the evidence (in CA we would file objections to the evidence in an effort to exclude it) due to some technical defect, the consumer defendant can create a material issue of fact (such that a motion for Summary Judgment should clearly be denied) by avering that the amount alleged to be due is incorrect. Perhaps better stated, if AmEx’s motion says you owe 10K and in your opposition to swear you only owe 8K, the judge should deny the motion. I’ve had much better success with this as many judges, for reasons that still elude me, will allow technical defects (especially those that can be “corrected) in motions and pleadings. On the other hand if AmEx swears you owe 10K and you swear you owe 8K, there is not much the judge can do. For better or worse, I’ve had some judges accept the lower amount and enter the 8K judgment. This is all a bit of an over simplification of course. Also, I AM NOT SUGGESTING THAT ANY DEFENDANT SWEAR TO SOMETHING THAT IS NOT TRUE. DO NOT LIE. That being said, what is actually due is an important fact and many many times what the creditor says is due is not correct. Late fees, interest, penalties, and even the principal amount, can all be disputed.

Leave a Comment

Scroll to Top