James Goosby, Appellant, v. The Bank of New York Mellon f/k/a The Bank of New York, etc., et al., Appellees. (2026)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

James Goosby, Appellant, v. The Bank of New York Mellon f/k/a The Bank of New York, etc., et al., Appellees.

No. 3D25-2471

Decided: August 13, 2026

Before GORDO, LOBREE and GOODEN, JJ.

Louis C. Arslanian (Hollywood), for appellant. Greenspoon Marder LLP, and Dariel Abrahamy (Boca Raton); The Griffith Law Firm, P.A., and Derek R. Griffith, for appellees.

Affirmed. See U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Vogel, 137 So. 3d 491, 493 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“The standard of review of a trial court's ruling on a motion to set aside a foreclosure sale is whether the trial court grossly abused its discretion.”); Beacon Hill Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Colfin Ah-Florida 7, LLC, 221 So. 3d 710, 712 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (“The standard of review on appeal of a motion for rehearing is abuse of discretion.”); Bank of Am., N.A. v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 338 So. 3d 338, 341 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (“A trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for reconsideration or rehearing which raises an issue that could have, but wasn't, raised in the initial motion or at the initial hearing.”); Grossfeld v. CV Funding, LLC, 432 So. 3d 683, 685 (Fla. 3d DCA 2026) (stating an evidentiary hearing is not required where there is insufficient dispute regarding “existence, validity, or terms” of settlement agreement).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network