MOSKOVITS v. MTGLQ INVESTORS (2020)

Appellant Alexander Moskovits, pro se, appeals a final judgment of foreclosure and an order denying his motion for leave to amend to assert a counterclaim and crossclaim for fraud in the inducement. We affirm.

Moskovits raises two arguments. First, he argues that final summary judgment was improper because Appellee MTGLQ Investors, LP failed to prove standing. We disagree. Based on the record before us, a copy of the note with a blank endorsement was attached to the verified foreclosure complaint. This was sufficient to establish standing to bring the foreclosure action. See U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Zayas, 290 So.3d 972 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (citing HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Buset, 241 So. 3d 882 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)); PNC Bank, N.A. v. Clark, 211 So. 3d 265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).

Moskovits also argues the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion to amend. A review of the record discloses no such error. After five years of pre-trial motions and three separate and unsuccessful attempts to file a legally sufficient counterclaim, Moskovits's last motion to amend simply came too little and too late.

We therefore affirm both the trial court's entry of final judgment of foreclosure and the order denying Moskovits's motion to amend.

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.