Motion For Relief From Judgment

793 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Harcon Barge Co., Inc. v. D & G Boat Rentals, Inc.
  784 F.2d 665· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-12 ·cited 137×
  A post-judgment motion to alter or amend the judgment served within ten days of entry, other than for purely clerical errors, must be treated as a Rule 59(e) motion for purposes of appellate timing rules.
• Arnaldo Curbelo, M.D. v. Ullman
  571 So. 2d 443· Fla.· 1990-12-06 ·cited 133×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Rule 1.540 is not the proper vehicle for challenging a judgment entered after a non-jury trial when a jury trial was demanded and not waived. Instead, such errors must be corrected through timely appeal or motion for new trial, not collateral a
• Francisco v. Victoria Marine Shipping, Inc.
  486 So. 2d 1386· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-04-15 ·cited 127×
  This appeal addresses whether a trial court has authority to entertain a motion for rehearing directed to an order denying a motion for relief from judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540. The Third District Court of Appeal held that such orders, though final, are no
• Miller v. Fortune Ins. Co.
  484 So. 2d 1221· Fla.· 1986-03-06 ·cited 120×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that trial courts have jurisdiction under Rule 1.540(b) to grant relief from voluntary dismissals containing clerical or substantive errors reflecting mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, rejecting the jurisdictional bar established in Randl
• BMW OF N. Am., Inc. v. Krathen
  471 So. 2d 585· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-06-12 ·cited 117×
  BMW appealed a judgment entered pursuant to an offer of judgment rule after the Krathens accepted BMW's settlement offer. BMW sought to vacate or modify the judgment, claiming that return of the vehicle was an implied condition precedent to the $20,500 settlement offer. The court
• Babcock v. Whatmore
  707 So. 2d 702· Fla.· 1998-02-26 ·cited 109×
  The Florida Supreme Court clarified when a defendant waives a timely objection to personal jurisdiction by seeking affirmative relief. The Court held that a defendant who seeks affirmative relief—not merely defensive motions—waives a jurisdictional challenge, resolving a conflict
• Pino v. The Bank OF NEW York
  121 So. 3d 23· Fla.· 2013-02-07 ·cited 103×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a trial court lacks jurisdiction to strike a plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal based on fraud allegations unless the fraud resulted in the plaintiff obtaining affirmative relief that was then protected by the dismissal. The decision add
• Pruitt v. Brock
  437 So. 2d 768· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-09-13 ·cited 91×
  This case addresses whether a timely motion for rehearing tolls the one-year deadline for filing a motion for relief from judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b). The court held that the one-year period does not commence until the motion for rehearing is disposed
• V. T. A., Inc. v. Airco, Inc.
  597 F.2d 220· 10th Cir.· 1979-04-19 ·cited 79×
  The court affirmed the denial of the Rule 60(b) motion, finding the sixteen-month delay unreasonable for claims under 60(b)(5) and (6), and the judgment not void under 60(b)(4). The court also affirmed the denial of the contempt motion, finding the differences between the Vac-Tec
• Fortin v. Comm'r OF the Mass. Dep't OF Pub. Welf.
  692 F.2d 790· 1st Cir.· 1982-11-04 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the Department of Public Welfare was in substantial noncompliance with a consent decree and properly held in civil contempt, and that the district court did not err in denying the motion to amend the decree.
• DOE v. Busbee
  684 F.2d 1375· 11th Cir.· 1982-09-07 ·cited 62×
  A party is not considered a "prevailing party" entitled to attorney's fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1988 if their initial favorable judgment is later vacated or reversed on the merits.
• Robert M. Gibson et ux. v. Buice
  381 So. 2d 349· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-03-26 ·cited 62×
  The trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion for relief from judgment when the court failed to provide formal notice of the judgment's entry as required by rule.
• Gulf Coast Bldg. & Supply Co., Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. OF Elec. Workers, Local NO. 480, AFL-CIO
  460 F.2d 105· 5th Cir.· 1972-05-12 ·cited 62×
  The district court erred in reforming a prior judgment to remove prejudgment interest because the appellate court's prior affirmance was law of the case, and the motion for relief under Rule 60(b) was untimely and improperly applied.
• Cerniglia v. Cerniglia
  679 So. 2d 1160· Fla.· 1996-09-05 ·cited 59×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that allegations of coercion, duress, and fraudulent financial disclosure in a marital settlement agreement constitute intrinsic fraud subject to a one-year time limit for seeking relief, not extrinsic fraud that could be raised at any time. The cou
• Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. The Rath Packing Co.
  787 F.2d 318· 8th Cir.· 1986-03-20 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the district judge did not abuse his discretion in denying retroactive competitive seniority and in defining the relevant labor pool for backpay calculations.
• Baker v. Baker
  394 So. 2d 465· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-02-11 ·cited 56×
  Mary Louise Baker appealed the trial court's denial of her motion to set aside a property settlement agreement executed in anticipation of divorce. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed, finding that the husband's misrepresentations regarding the source and nature of incom
• Pagan v. Am. Airlines, Inc.
  534 F.2d 990· 1st Cir.· 1976-05-05 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appellant's Rule 60(b) motion because the appellant and his counsel were aware of the settlement terms and deadlines but failed to act, leading to the loss of rights.
• Sec. Bank, N.A. v. Bellsouth Advertising & Publ'g Corp.
  679 So. 2d 795· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-07-24 ·cited 53×
  Security Bank appeals the trial court's denial of its motion to set aside a final judgment in a garnishment proceeding brought by BellSouth. The court affirms the denial of the motion to set aside the default on liability but reverses and remands regarding the final judgment on d
• Jeb Bush v. Schiavo
  885 So. 2d 321· Fla.· 2004-09-23 ·cited 52×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Chapter 2003-418, emergency legislation enacted by the Florida Legislature to authorize the Governor to override a final judicial order directing withdrawal of life support from Theresa Schiavo, violates the state constitutional doctrine of sep
• Veldrin D. Freemon v. Deutsche Bank Tr. Co. Americas
  46 So. 3d 1202· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-11-10 ·cited 51×
  Homeowner Veldrin Freemon, who failed to answer a foreclosure complaint and received a default judgment, sought relief from judgment claiming the affidavit of indebtedness lacked personal knowledge. The Fourth District affirmed the trial court's denial of relief, holding that Fre
• Keller v. Belcher
  256 So. 2d 561· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-12-07 ·cited 51×
  The court denied the petition for rehearing, adhering to its prior decision.
• State v. Bailey
  603 So. 2d 1384· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-08-28 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a trial court must vacate a judgment awarding prejudgment interest against the state, as such an award is void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction due to sovereign immunity.
• Smiles v. Young
  271 So. 2d 798· Fla. 3d DCA· 1973-01-08 ·cited 50×
  Defendants appealed the trial court's order vacating a settlement judgment in a personal injury case. The plaintiffs sought relief under Rule 1.540 based on alleged unilateral mistake and defendant misconduct regarding an undisclosed serious injury. The appellate court reversed,
• Williams v. Cruise Ships Catering & Serv. Int'l
  320 F. Supp. 2d 1347· S.D. Fla.· 2004-06-09 ·cited 49×
  The court held that the defendants' extensive business operations and significant contacts within the United States, particularly Carnival Corporation's substantial ownership and control of Costa Crociere and its subsidiaries, justified the application of the Jones Act and preclu
• Steinhorst v. State
  636 So. 2d 498· Fla.· 1994-04-21 ·cited 49×
  The dissenting justice argues that the majority opinion incorrectly grants relief, as the judge's prior representation of a victim's estate was not legally disqualifying.
• Bank ONE v. Arleen Batronie and Gene Batronie
  884 So. 2d 346· Fla. 2d DCA· 2004-09-10 ·cited 48×
  Bank One appeals the circuit court's order setting aside a final foreclosure judgment against homeowners. The court reverses because the homeowners filed their motion for relief more than one year after the judgment was entered, placing it outside the jurisdictional time limit of
• McALICE v. Kirsch
  368 So. 2d 401· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-02-27 ·cited 48×
  In this mortgage foreclosure appeal, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed a default judgment against McAlice, finding that constructive service of process was defective because the notice failed to name him as a defendant and there was insufficient evidence of diligent sea
• King v. State
  911 So. 2d 229· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-09-28 ·cited 47×
  King appeals the summary denial of his postconviction motion challenging his designation as a sexual predator. The Second District Court of Appeal recedes from its prior precedent, adopting the Fifth District's approach that sexual predator designations can be challenged through
• Claudiatte Pierce v. Cook & Co., Inc.
  518 F.2d 720· 10th Cir.· 1975-06-24 ·cited 47×
  The court concurred in the result, finding that Rule 60(b)(6) justified disturbing a final judgment to effect fundamental justice when state law changed after removal.
• Wilson v. Woodward
  602 So. 2d 547· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-06-12 ·cited 45×
  Wilson, as trustee of a real estate sale, appeals a partial summary judgment in favor of Woodward regarding extension fees. The court reversed, finding that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the contract was modified to allow extension fees to be deposited
• Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. A & P Steel, Inc.
  733 F.2d 509· 8th Cir.· 1984-04-25 ·cited 45×
  The court held that the denial of the Tribe's motion for relief from judgment was an abuse of discretion, and that an erroneous agency instruction given to the jury was prejudicial.
• Blimpie Cap. Venture, Inc. v. Palms Plaza P'rs, Ltd.
  636 So. 2d 838· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-05-06 ·cited 44×
  Blimpie challenged the trial court's denial of its motion for relief from a default judgment for unpaid rent, claiming the landlord Palms Plaza committed fraud by retaking possession and leasing the property to third parties while collecting accelerated rent damages. The appellat
• Helmich v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
  136 So. 3d 763· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-04-25 ·cited 43×
  Scott Helmich appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to vacate a foreclosure judgment. The Florida First District Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal as untimely, holding that a trial court lacks authority to sua sponte rehear or reconsider its denial of a motion for re
• Capone v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
  116 So. 3d 363· Fla.· 2013-06-13 ·cited 43×
  Karen Capone sought to amend her deceased husband Frank's personal injury action against Philip Morris to add a wrongful death claim after his death. The Florida Supreme Court held that personal injury actions do not automatically terminate upon a plaintiff's death, and personal
• Strommen v. Strommen
  927 So. 2d 176· Fla. 2d DCA· 2006-04-28 ·cited 43×
  Paul Strommen appeals an order granting his ex-wife relief from judgment that set aside five years of custody and child support rulings based solely on the failure to file a UCCJA affidavit. The court reverses, holding that while the UCCJA affidavit requirement is a mandatory ple
• Rash N'Karry Wholesale Supermarkets, Inc. v. Ceasar V. Garcia
  221 So. 2d 786· Fla. 2d DCA· 1969-04-18 ·cited 41×
  In this negligence case, the trial court entered summary judgment for the defendant supermarket, but later set it aside after the plaintiff filed motions to reconsider. The appellate court reversed and remanded to determine whether the plaintiff's counsel's delay in receiving not
• Zarate v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co.
  81 So. 3d 556· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-02-22 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the defendant's motion for relief from judgment was untimely and procedurally barred due to the lack of an adequate record on appeal.
• Pensacola Beach Pier, Inc. v. King
  66 So. 3d 321· Fla. 1st DCA· 2011-06-20 ·cited 40×
  Pensacola Beach Pier, Inc. appealed a final summary judgment dismissing their tortious interference, defamation, and civil conspiracy claims arising from a 13-year dispute over contract rights to operate a concession stand on a pier. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, fin
• Orange Motors OF Coral Gables, Inc. v. Rueben H. Donnelley Corp. & Fritchman Assocs., Inc.
  415 So. 2d 892· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-06-29 ·cited 40×
  Orange Motors sued Rueben H. Donnelley Corporation for negligence in failing to publish its yellow pages listing and joined Fritchman Associates as a defendant. After Fritchman's default was vacated due to defective service of process and insufficient jurisdictional allegations,
• Mack v. United States
  635 F.2d 20· 1st Cir.· 1980-12-03 ·cited 40×
  The court held that the district court erred in accepting the defendant's guilty plea without adequately ensuring it was voluntary and that the defendant understood the charges, and also erred in denying a hearing on the motion to vacate sentence.
• Indymac Fed. Bank FSB v. Hagan
  104 So. 3d 1232· Fla. 3d DCA· 2012-12-19 ·cited 38×
  IndyMac Federal Bank sought a certificate of title after purchasing the Hagans' property at foreclosure sale, but the trial court delayed issuance pending resolution of the Hagans' motion challenging the foreclosure. The appellate court reversed, holding that the Hagans' motion w
• In re Medina
  109 F.3d 1556· 11th Cir.· 1997-03-24 ·cited 38×
  Pedro Medina, sentenced to death for auto theft and first-degree murder, filed a second federal habeas corpus petition after his first petition was denied and his conviction affirmed. The Eleventh Circuit held that the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) amendme
• Meral Smith v. Evans
  853 F.2d 155· 3d Cir.· 1988-07-21 ·cited 38×
  An untimely Rule 59(e) motion does not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal, and the appeal must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
• Clarke v. Burkle
  570 F.2d 824· 8th Cir.· 1978-02-21 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by denying the plaintiff's motion for relief from judgment without an evidentiary hearing, and that the summary judgment for the defendant in the second case must also be vacated pending the outcome of that hearing.
• In re Guardianship of Theresa Marie Schiavo v. Schiavo
  792 So. 2d 551· Fla. 2d DCA· 2001-07-11 ·cited 36×
  This consolidated appeal addresses whether parents of an incapacitated woman in a persistent vegetative state can challenge a guardianship court order authorizing discontinuation of life-prolonging procedures. The court holds that interested parties have standing to seek relief u
• Barnett v. Barnett
  718 So. 2d 302· Fla. 2d DCA· 1998-09-11 ·cited 36×
  Susan Barnett appealed two post-judgment orders in her divorce case from Larry Barnett. The court affirmed the denial of her motion to disqualify the trial judge as untimely, but reversed the judge's order vacating a default judgment entered against Larry Barnett as a sanction fo
• Sanders v. Clemco Indus. & Ingersoll-Rand Co.
  862 F.2d 161· 8th Cir.· 1988-11-30 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the appeal of the summary judgment was untimely because the motion for reconsideration did not toll the appeal period, but the appeal of the denial of that motion was timely. The court affirmed the denial of the motion for reconsideration.
• Manny Berger v. Heckler
  771 F.2d 1556· 2d Cir.· 1985-08-26 ·cited 36×
  The court held that the Secretary's arguments regarding mootness and nonparty enforcement were without merit, and affirmed the district court's orders, with a modification to the amendment concerning the promulgation of regulations.
• In re Burley v. Burley
  738 F.2d 981· 9th Cir.· 1984-07-03 ·cited 36×
  The Ninth Circuit's Order Establishing Appellate Review Procedures in Bankruptcy Cases is unconstitutional because it grants Bankruptcy Appellate Panels (BAPs) jurisdiction over cases not appealed to the circuit court and over interlocutory orders, which lack sufficient Article I
• Parker v. Parker
  950 So. 2d 388· Fla.· 2007-02-01 ·cited 34×
  The Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts regarding whether a wife's misrepresentation of paternity in a dissolution of marriage proceeding constitutes intrinsic or extrinsic fraud. The Court held that such misrepresentation is intrinsic fraud, requiri