Bank of America, N.A. v. Rodriguez
After consenting to a stipulated final judgment of foreclosure (in exchange for a deficiency waiver and a 90-day sale delay), the borrower filed an independent action more than a year later to vacate the judgment, labeling the bank's alleged misconduct extrinsic fraud. The Third District held the allegations were in fact intrinsic fraud—matters that were or could have been tried in the foreclosure case—so relief was barred by the one-year limit of Rule 1.540(b), and a plaintiff cannot evade that bar by recasting intrinsic fraud as extrinsic fraud in an independent action. The court granted certiorari and quashed the order denying the bank's motion to dismiss, holding that denial of a motion to dismiss on litigation privilege grounds constitutes irreparable harm as a matter of law.
Key facts
- Bank of America sought foreclosure against Rodriguez, who consented to a stipulated final judgment of foreclosure in exchange for a deficiency waiver and a 90-day delay of the sale.
- More than one year after the judgment was entered, Rodriguez filed an independent action to vacate the judgment, alleging the bank committed extrinsic fraud through misleading correspondence and statements.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision gives defendants a strong tool against post-judgment 'fraud on the court' collateral attacks in foreclosure and other contexts: courts will look past the extrinsic-fraud label and enforce Rule 1.540(b)'s… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.