Case Name: Ann LYON, as guardian of Katherine A. Lyon, Appellant, v. Keith SANFORD, the Bank of New York, as Trustee Pursuant to the Terms of that Certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of August 1, 1999, Related to Metropolitan Asset Funding, Inc. II, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1999-B, United States of America, City of Jacksonville, Florida, Equicredit Corporation Of America, Suddath Van Lines, Inc., d/b/a Suddath Relocation Systems, Inc., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2005-03-21
Citations: 911 So. 2d 806
Docket Number: No. 1D03-4621
Parties: Ann LYON, as guardian of Katherine A. Lyon, Appellant, v. Keith SANFORD, the Bank of New York, as Trustee Pursuant to the Terms of that Certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of August 1, 1999, Related to Metropolitan Asset Funding, Inc. II, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1999-B, United States of America, City of Jacksonville, Florida, Equicredit Corporation Of America, Suddath Van Lines, Inc., d/b/a Suddath Relocation Systems, Inc., Appellees.
Judges: ALLEN, J., Concurs; ERVIN, J., Dissents with Opinion.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 911
Pages: 806–813

Head Matter:
Ann LYON, as guardian of Katherine A. Lyon, Appellant, v. Keith SANFORD, the Bank of New York, as Trustee Pursuant to the Terms of that Certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement Dated as of August 1, 1999, Related to Metropolitan Asset Funding, Inc. II, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1999-B, United States of America, City of Jacksonville, Florida, Equicredit Corporation Of America, Suddath Van Lines, Inc., d/b/a Suddath Relocation Systems, Inc., Appellees.
No. 1D03-4621.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
March 21, 2005.
Rehearing Denied May 2, 2005.
Calvin E. Hayden and W. David Vaughn of Hayden, Facciolo & Vaughn, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellant.
Sidney E. Lewis and Lawrence J. Bernard of Lewis & Bernard, P.A., Jacksonville for Appellee Keith Sanford.
Roy A. Diaz and Marian Kennady of Smith Hiatt & Diaz, P.A., Fort Lauder-dale; and Raymond A. Piccin of Vargas, Zion & Kahane, P.A., Hollywood, for Ap-pellee The Bank of New York.
Steven A. Nisbet, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Tampa, and Bruce D. Page, Assistant General Counsel, Jacksonville, for Appel-lee United States of America.
Echevarria and Associates, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee Equicredit Corporation of America.
Christopher D. Ritchie of Boyd & Jener-ette, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellee Sud-dath Van Lines, Inc. d/b/a Suddath Relocation Systems, Inc.

Opinion:
BENTON, J.
After she failed to make mortgage payments, and ignored the correspondence and legal papers that resulted, a foreclosure judgment was entered against Katherine A. Lyon, her house was sold at auction to satisfy the judgment, and the new owner sought and obtained a writ of possession. Katherine's lawyer then filed an emergency motion for stay of writ of possession and an emergency motion to vacate sale and set aside final judgment. After a hearing, these motions were denied.
On appeal, counsel, now representing Ann Lyon, Katherine's after-appointed guardian, argues that a homestead owner's putative, unadjudicated incapacity to make mortgage payments and respond to legal process, because of "a dissociative disorder since childhood" causing "self-destructive behavior, a severely low self-esteem, and denial," can be a basis to set aside a default foreclosure judgment and judicial sale. But this abstract question is not before us for decision.
As for what is before us, the appellant has failed to establish grounds for reversal. The trial court denied relief after conducting a hearing under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540, presumably taking the competing equities in the present case into account. This order has not been shown to be an abuse of discretion. See Gulf State Bank v. Blue Skies, Inc. of Ga., 639 So.2d 161, 162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (appellant must show an "abuse of discretion"). See also LPP Mortgage Ltd. v. Bank of Am., N.A., 826 So.2d 462, 463-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) ("Whether relief should be granted pursuant to Rule 1.540 is a fact specific question and the trial court's ruling should not be disturbed on appeal absent a gross abuse of discretion."). Appellant does not contend that an additional opportunity to present evidence was requested at the emergency hearing, and has not shown that any procedural irregularity occurred.
Affirmed.
ALLEN, J., Concurs; ERVIN, J., Dissents with Opinion.