Non-Argument Calendar U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION as Trustee of J.P. Morgan Alternative Loan Trust 2006-S4 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates v. FERNANDO V. RIVABEM LISET RIVABEM

Holding: The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the denial of attorneys' fees because the dismissal for failure to serve process did not make the defendants prevailing parties under Florida law.
Standard: Moritz significant issues test
Vote: Per Curiam decision affirming the district court.
Practical effect: Lenders who dismiss foreclosure actions due to procedural service errors cannot be forced to pay borrowers' attorneys' fees under Florida's reciprocity statute unless the dismissal resolves a substantive dispute.

Non-Argument Calendar U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION as Trustee of J.P. Morgan Alternative Loan Trust 2006-S4 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates v. FERNANDO V. RIVABEM LISET RIVABEM

April 27, 2026 ·1:24-cv-20441-DPG ·Per Curiam · By James Taylor

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a district court order denying attorneys' fees to borrowers in a foreclosure dispute. The court held that dismissing a case for failure to serve process within the required timeframe does not make the defendants prevailing parties under Florida law.

Background

U.S. Bank filed a foreclosure action against the Rivabems but failed to serve them within ninety days of filing the complaint. The district court dismissed the case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure four point m. The Rivabems then moved for attorneys’ fees and costs, arguing they were prevailing parties under Florida Statute section five seven point one zero five seven. The district court denied the motion, and the Rivabems appealed.

The court’s reasoning

The court applied Florida law to determine if the Rivabems were prevailing parties. Under the Moritz test, a prevailing party must prevail on a significant issue in the litigation. The court found that the dismissal was based solely on the failure to serve process, not on any disputed factual or legal issue regarding the merits of the loan or foreclosure. Because the dismissal did not resolve any significant issue or change the legal relationship between the parties on the merits, the Rivabems were not prevailing parties.

What it means going forward

Lenders who dismiss foreclosure actions due to procedural service errors cannot be forced to pay borrowers’ attorneys’ fees under Florida’s reciprocity statute unless the dismissal resolves a substantive dispute.