In a mortgage foreclosure action, the Second District Court of Appeal found a lack of evidence presented in the trial court regarding damages wherein the mortgagee utilized a single witness who produced a payment history. The witness, however, was unable to explain the documents or the figures contained therein. Further, the witness was unable to testify as to accounting procedures of the mortgagee. Thus, the amount of indebtedness could not be ascertained by simply introducing a loan payment history requiring reversal as to damages.
The Court noted that a sufficiency of the evidence claim could be raised for the first time on appeal.
The opinion may be found at: