COLLINS & AIKMAN PRODUCTS COMPANY, INC., F/K/A COLLINS & AIKMAN GROUP, INC., COLLINS & AIKMAN CORPORATION, EDWARD S.G. HICKS, JR., A/K/A GUNNAR HICKS, NABIL HANSEN AND GEORGE A. LONGTIN, APPELLANTS,
v.
TELEFLEX INCORPORATED, SERMATECH INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED, AND SERMATECH ENGINEERING GROUP, INC., F/K/A SERMATECH ACQUISITION, INC., APPELLEES

Fla. 4th DCA | 2003-06-25
No. 4D03-764
POLEN, C.J., HAZOURI and MAY, JJ., concur.
847 So. 2d 1143 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2003)

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.


Holding

The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order vacating the judgment.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellants sought review of a trial court order vacating a prior summary judgment. The trial court vacated the judgment because a related New York jud…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants seek review of a trial court’s order that granted appellees’ rule 1.540 motion to vacate a judgment. The initial judgment was entered upon a motion for summary judgment. The trial court granted the summary judgment motion in light of a post-trial decision and judgment of the Supreme Court of New York in related litigation. Collins & Aikman Prod. Co. v. Sermatech Eng’g Group, Inc., No. 606229/96 (N.Y.Sup.Ct. Mar. 22, 2001).

When the New York Appellate Court reversed the judgment in part, Appellees moved to vacate the Palm Beach County judgment. Collins & Aikman Prods. Co. v. Sermatech Eng’g Group, Inc., 297 A.D.2d 248, 746 N.Y.S.2d 698 (2002). The trial court granted relief noting that it had granted the motion for summary judgment on the basis of the New York judgment.

We find no error and affirm. This court’s affirmance is without prejudice to Appellants raising the claims of res judica-ta or collateral estoppel as defenses in the pending litigation.

POLEN, C.J., HAZOURI and MAY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw