IDEAL ROCK PRODUCTS CO., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
HENRY'S DRIVE-IN OF FLORIDA, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, DEFENDANT
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.
The Circuit Court can consider evidence from the Civil Court of Record when ruling on a motion for summary judgment after transfer.
A case was transferred from the Civil Court of Record to the Circuit Court. The Circuit Court considered a motion for summary judgment.…
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 Transfer Of Cause cases and more on FLexlaw
The following question has been certified 1 to this Court by the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit:
“Following the transfer of a cause under Rule 1.39(b) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure [30 F.S.A.], from the Civil Court of Record to the Circuit Court, pursuant to mandate, can the Circuit Court, in ruling on a motion for summary judgment, consider documentary evidence, depositions and transcript of trial, properly placed in the record prior to the exceeding of the jurisdiction of the Civil Court of Record where such record has been transmitted with a certified copy of the order of transfer to the Circuit Court?”
We have examined the question, the basis upon which it was certified and the briefs of the parties.2 We have determined that the question is one which should be answered under the rules previously set forth in Schwob Co. of Florida v. Florida Industrial Commission, 152 Fla. 203, 11 So.2d 782; Davies v. Davies, Fla.App.1959, 113 So.2d 250.
It has frequently been pointed out that the rules of court should be administered for an expeditious disposal of litigation in the interest of justice. Glassman v. Deauville Enterprises, Inc., Fla.App.1958, 99 So.2d 641.
Judicial work should not be repeated unless necessary to correct the error which the reviewing court found prejudicial, or unless the court lacked jurisdiction. The question certified points out that when the record was made, the Civil Court of Record had jurisdiction; therefore, the record prior to the judgment need not be discarded because the court had jurisdiction to make the record. We hold that the question certified should be and is answered in the affirmative.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Henry Stiles, Inc. v. Evans, 206 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)…g that the spirit of the rules should prevail over the letter are Davis v. Evans, Fla.App.1961, 132 So. 2d 476, cited in Young v. Pyle, Fla.App.1967, 193 So. 2d 659 at 663, and Rleal Rock Products Co. v. Henry’s Drive-In of Fla., Inc., Fla.App.1963, 152 So. 2d 791.…
Authorities Cited
- Schwob Co. of Fla. v. Fla. Indus. Comm'n, 152 Fla. 203 (Fla. 1942)
- Long v. Long, 99 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)
- Blaise Jacques v. Efurd, 113 So. 2d 250 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)
- Henry's Drive-In, Inc. v. Ideal Rock Prods. Co., 140 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)