MIAMI-DADE COUNTY
v.
LOUISE DAVIS, ET AL.
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.
A trial court is divested of jurisdiction to enter orders once a notice of appeal is filed, and any orders entered during the pendency of an appeal are void.
[1] A trial court is divested of jurisdiction to enter any orders modifying a judgment once a notice of appeal is filed, and orders entered during the pendency of an appeal a…
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“It is well settled that . . . a trial court is divested of jurisdiction upon the filing of a notice of appeal. Accordingly, a trial court is without jurisdiction to modify a judgment, while that judgment is pending on appeal, in the absence of the appellate court relinquishing jurisdiction to the trial court for that purpose.”
Court citing Fonseca v. Taverna Imps., Inc., 193 So. 3d 92, 94 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
Miami-Dade County sought to confiscate the Davises' dog pursuant to an ex parte order issued March 30, 2023. The Davises appealed that order, but befo…
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 Unconstitutional Delegation Of Legislative Power cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed July 24, 2024.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. Nos. 3D23-1287 & 3D23-1304 Lower Tribunal No. 23-6429 CC
Miami-Dade County,
Appellant,
vs.
Louise Davis, et al.,
Appellees.
Appeals from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Diana Gonzalez-Whyte, Judge.
Geraldine Bonzon-Keenan, Miami-Dade County Attorney, and Sabrina Levin and Christopher J. Wahl, Assistant County Attorneys, for appellant. L. Turner Law, P.A., and Lauren N. Peffer (Boca Raton), for appellees. Before SCALES, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
In this consolidated case, Miami-Dade County appeals both (i) a July 15, 2023 injunction order (case number 3D23-1287), and (ii) a July 18, 2023 order that voided a March 30, 2023 ex parte final order that authorized the County to confiscate appellees Louise and William Scott Davis's allegedly dangerous dog (case number 3D23-1304). The July 18th order also found section 767.12 of the Florida Statutes to be "an unconstitutional delegation of power." We consolidated the two appeals. Because both challenged orders were entered after the Davises appealed the March 30th ex parte final order (case number 3D23-0575), but before the Davises voluntarily dismissed that appeal in October 2023, both of the challenged orders were rendered while the trial court was divested of jurisdiction. Fonseca v. Taverna Imps., Inc., 193 So. 3d 92, 94 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (“It is well settled that . . . a trial court is divested of jurisdiction upon the filing of a notice of appeal. Accordingly, a trial court is without jurisdiction to modify a judgment, while that judgment is pending on appeal, in the absence of the appellate court relinquishing jurisdiction to the trial court for that purpose.") (citations omitted).
Therefore, without reaching the merits, we quash both orders as having been entered while the trial court was without jurisdiction over the case. See Bemben v. Chock, 938 So. 2d 565, 566 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). Orders quashed.