GERALDINE ACCETTURO, APPELLANT,
v.
AMERICAN FIDELITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Accetturo appeals a venue transfer order and American Fidelity appeals a dismissal order in two consolidated cases. The court holds that when venue is transferred on forum non conveniens grounds (rather than improper venue), the moving party must pay the transfer fee under Florida Statutes § 47.191, and Rule 1.060(c) does not apply.
Rule 1.060(c) does not apply to venue transfers based on forum non conveniens; it applies only to transfers from improper venue. Under § 47.191, the party moving for a venue change must pay the transfer fee. Therefore, American Fidelity was responsible for the fee, Accetturo's dismissal was in error, and the order vacating dismissal was proper.
[1] A motion for rehearing is not an authorized motion directed to a nonfinal order for purposes of tolling the time to appeal.
[2] A trial court order denying a motion to vacate a prior order transferring venue is affirmed when the motion to vacate is an untimely attempt to relitigate the venue decis…
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“[QUOTE REDACTED — failed verbatim audit (paraphrase, not verbatim). See original_text for the text as originally displayed.]”
Establishes that Rule 1.060(c) does not apply to forum non conveniens transfers, only to transfers from improper venue.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAccetturo filed a civil suit against American Fidelity in Broward County. American Fidelity moved to transfer venue to Escambia County, which the tria…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Order Of Dismissal cases and more on FLexlaw
[*674] POLEN, Judge.
In case number 96-0242, Geraldine Accet-turo appeals a trial court order denying her motion to vacate an order entered by a predecessor judge, transferring venue in the civil suit against American Fidelity Life Insurance Company (American) to Escambia County, Florida. American appeals a later order granting Accetturo’s motion to vacate an order of dismissal in case number 96-2103.
The order transferring venue from Broward County to Escambia was entered by the predecessor judge in August 1996 upon appellee’s (successful) motion. Appellant moved for rehearing (unsuccessful). Appellant then sought to appeal the transfer of venue, but because the motion for rehearing was not an authorized motion directed to a nonfinal order, the appeal was dismissed as being untimely filed (unsuccessful). Not yet daunted, the appellant then moved the successor judge to vacate the order of transfer (unsuccessful). This attempted fifth bite of the apple should not be permitted. Further, appellant’s argument on the merits is unpersuasive.
We affirm the order denying the motion to vacate the transfer order. On American’s appeal, the order of dismissal was entered due to appellant’s failure to pay the clerk’s fee for transferring the case from Broward County to Escambia County. Appellant was successful in having this order vacated, based on her claim that under section 47.191, Florida Statutes (1993), the party moving for the change of venue must pay the transfer fee.
American argues on appeal that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.060(c) is in conflict with section 47.191, and being a procedural rule, takes precedence over the statute. We need not reach this question, as we hold rule 1.060(c) does not apply in this case. Subsections (a) and (b) of rule 1.060 deal only with an action filed in the wrong venue. Subsection (e) then describes the responsibility for paying the filing fee when “an action is transferred under this rule ...” (emphasis supplied). Here, the order changing venue was based on forum non conveniens, not because venue in Broward County was improper.
Accordingly, the earlier order dismissing the complaint for Accetturo’s failure to pay the filing fee was in error.
The trial court properly vacated the order of dismissal, because it was American’s obligation as the movant to pay the transfer fee under section 47.191.
We affirm in case no. 96-2103.
GLICKSTEIN and WARNER, JJ., concur.