JAMES L. MURPHY
v.
MIAMI FL HOME SOLUTIONS LLC
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.
Rule 1.540(b) motions cannot be used to correct alleged legal error in a final judgment; they are limited to the strictly enumerated grounds specified in the rule.
[1] Rule 1.540(b) motions are limited to strictly enumerated grounds for relief and cannot be used to correct alleged legal error on the merits of a final judgment.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Rule 1.540(b) allows a trial court, in very narrow, strictly enumerated instances, to revisit findings and holdings contained in final orders and judgments.”
Court explaining the limited scope of Rule 1.540(b) relief
Murphy, self-represented, filed fifteen Rule 1.540(b) motions seeking to vacate a May 8, 2020 final judgment requiring him to specifically perform und…
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 Abuse Of Discretion (Standard Of Review) cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed October 2, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-2061 Lower Tribunal No. 18-11819 ________________
James L. Murphy, Appellant,
vs.
Miami FL Home Solutions LLC, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose M. Rodriguez, Judge.
James L. Murphy, in proper person.
Gulisano Law, PLLC, and Michael Gulisano (Boca Raton), for appellee.
Before EMAS, SCALES and MILLER, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2
Appellant James L. Murphy, self-represented, appeals the trial court’s denial of fifteen motions, all filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b), seeking to vacate a May 8, 2020 final judgment that required Murphy to specifically perform under a purchase and sale contract. Because Murphy set none of these motions for hearing, appellee Miami FL Home Solutions LLC set the motions for hearing on October 20, 2023, a hearing that Murphy did not attend. On October 23, 2023, the trial court entered the challenged order denying each of Murphy’s rule 1.540(b) motions. While not entirely clear from Murphy’s briefing, it appears that Murphy’s main argument on appeal is that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his rule 1.540(b) motions because he was not given proper notice of the October 20th hearing. The record, though, belies this contention. We note that, in his rule 1.540(b) motions, Murphy principally argues that the trial court committed legal error by entering the May 8, 2020 final judgment. Rule 1.540(b) provides very limited bases for a trial court to exercise jurisdiction over a case after a final judgment has been entered. Anderson v. Estate of Quintero, 388 So. 3d 938, 942 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024) (“Rule 1.540(b) allows a trial court, in very narrow, strictly enumerated instances, to revisit findings and holdings contained in final orders and judgments.”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Arnaldo Curbelo, M.D. v. Ullman, 571 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 1990)
- The Balmoral Condo. Ass'n v. Grimaldi, 107 So. 3d 1149 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)
- Law Offs. of Scott Alan Orth, P.A. v. In re Est. of Mario Quintero, 374 So. 3d 67 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)