Motion For Relief From Judgment

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

• Constance v. Constance
  366 So. 2d 804· Fla. 3d DCA· 1979-01-09 ·cited 24×
  Helen Constance appeals from a judgment declaring that funds she withdrew from three jointly-owned bank accounts belonged to her father Samuel Constance, not to her as joint owner. The court affirmed, holding that despite the signature cards establishing joint ownership on their
• Patterson v. The Am. Tobacco Co.
  586 F.2d 300· 4th Cir.· 1978-10-23 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United States requires further proceedings regarding the bona fides of the employer's seniority system, necessitating remand for specific findings.
• Beard v. State
  27 So. 3d 186· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-02-05 ·cited 23×
  Nathaniel Beard challenges an amended sentence that changed his concurrent prison terms to consecutive, increasing his total sentence from five to eight years. The court reverses and remands because the trial court failed to obtain the sentencing transcript necessary to determine
• Oriel Tananta v. Cruise Ships Catering & Servs. Int'l., N.V.
  909 So. 2d 874· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-12-22 ·cited 23×
  Five foreign seamen employed by Costa cruise lines sued in Miami-Dade County for personal injuries sustained aboard foreign-flagged vessels in international or foreign waters. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed dismissal under the doctrine of forum non conveniens, holdin
• Beal Bank v. Irwin J. and Marcia M. Sherwin
  829 So. 2d 961· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-10-30 ·cited 23×
  Beal Bank appealed an amended final judgment in a mortgage foreclosure case. The court affirmed, holding that Rule 1.540 relief from judgment cannot be used as a substitute for a timely appeal, and that an appeal from an amended judgment is limited to issues affected by the amend
• Franklin v. Lizzie Franklin
  573 So. 2d 401· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-01-22 ·cited 23×
  Franklin appeals the denial of his motion to set aside a default judgment in a divorce case that awarded his entire interest in the marital home to his wife. The court reverses, holding that Franklin's illiteracy, lack of counsel, and reasonable explanation for the nine-month del
• Landano v. Rafferty
  897 F.2d 661· 3d Cir.· 1990-02-27 ·cited 23×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the petitioner had exhausted his state remedies, arguing that the new evidence did not fundamentally alter the legal claim already considered by the state courts.
• Ruiz v. Hamburg-American Line
  478 F.2d 29· 9th Cir.· 1973-04-23 ·cited 23×
• Friedman v. Friedman
  224 So. 2d 424· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-06-10 ·cited 23×
  Jack Friedman was held in contempt for violating a temporary restraining order by proceeding with a Mexican divorce after a Florida court enjoined him from doing so. The appellate court affirmed the contempt judgment, holding that although the restraining order may have been erro
• Crowley v. Crowley
  678 So. 2d 435· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-08-07 ·cited 22×
  In this Florida divorce case, the Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part a dissolution judgment, addressing the husband's claims regarding asset distribution, child support calculation, attorney's fees, relocation, and rehabilitative alimony. The co
• Nolan's Towing & Recovery v. Marino Trucking, Inc.
  581 So. 2d 644· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-06-18 ·cited 22×
  Nolan's Towing and Recovery appealed from a summary judgment order and an order denying its motion for relief from that judgment. The court dismissed the appeal of both orders as non-final and not properly appealable at that time, but allowed the appellant to raise these issues a
• Practical Concepts, Inc. v. Republic OF Bolivia
  811 F.2d 1543· D.C. Cir.· 1987-02-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court properly entertained Bolivia's motion to vacate the default judgment but erred in dismissing the action based on sovereign immunity, as the contract constituted commercial activity.
• Vito Matarese v. LeFEVRE
  801 F.2d 98· 2d Cir.· 1986-09-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the original habeas corpus judgment due to an untimely notice of appeal, but it had jurisdiction to review the denial of the Rule 60(b)(6) motion.
• Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. The Seaboard Corp.
  666 F.2d 414· 9th Cir.· 1982-01-25 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a default judgment entered solely for failure to pay monetary sanctions, without a corresponding failure to produce evidence, is void for want of jurisdiction and must be set aside under Rule 60(b)(4).
• Marlin Brown v. McCORMICK
  608 F.2d 410· 10th Cir.· 1979-10-17 ·cited 22×
  The court held that while the appellants' attorney had notice of the default judgment hearing, the complete exclusion of the appellants from a hearing where testimony was received to set remedies may raise due process concerns, but the lawyer's inaction on appeal prevents voiding
• Wolfsohn v. Hankin
  321 F.2d 393· D.C. Cir.· 1963-05-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that an untimely filed notice of appeal deprives the court of jurisdiction, and that a Rule 59 motion for rehearing, if untimely, does not toll the time for appeal.
• Great Am. Ins. Co. v. Bevis
  652 So. 2d 382· Fla. 2d DCA· 1995-01-13 ·cited 21×
  A judgment obtained on constructive service is not void for failure to allege the basis for service in the complaint if the evidence supporting service is in the record.
• In re Ctr. Wholesale, Inc. v. Ctr. Wholesale, Inc.
  759 F.2d 1440· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-10 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the one-day notice provided for the Cash Collateral Order violated due process, rendering the order void to the extent it allowed the debtor to foreclose on the creditor's security interest without adequate protection.
• Antuna v. Dawson
  459 So. 2d 1114· Fla. 4th DCA· 1984-11-14 ·cited 21×
  Antuna appeals the denial of his post-judgment motions to intervene and seek relief from a garnishment judgment affecting a joint bank account he held with Malloy. The court holds that although Antuna had a protectable interest in the account and the garnishment statute provides
• Jennifer Denise Halpern, M.D. v. Houser
  949 So. 2d 1155· Fla. 4th DCA· 2007-02-28 ·cited 20×
  The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's grant of relief from judgment to the Housers in a medical malpractice case. The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by granting the motion for relief without requiring sworn statements or condu
• Leander J. Coblentz, Jr. v. State
  775 So. 2d 359· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-10-27 ·cited 20×
  Leander Coblentz appeals the denial of a motion to correct an illegal sentence, challenging a sexual predator designation imposed at sentencing. The court affirms the denial but encourages Coblentz to pursue civil remedies such as declaratory relief, as the sexual predator status
• In re Est. OF Gwendolyn Gaffney Willis v. Gaffney
  677 So. 2d 949· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-07-31 ·cited 20×
  The Estate of Gwendolyn Gaffney Willis appealed a trial court's denial of its motion for relief from judgment, arguing the court erroneously treated the motion as untimely under Rule 1.530(b) when it should have been evaluated under Rule 1.540(b). The appellate court reversed, ho
• Will Thurman, Jr. v. The Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp.
  889 F.2d 1441· 5th Cir.· 1989-11-29 ·cited 20×
  The court held that FSLIC Corporate should have been allowed to intervene to defend the notes and liens using defenses available to the original party, but not to assert new federal defenses unique to its status.
• United States v. Elvin Berenguer
  821 F.2d 19· 1st Cir.· 1987-06-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for relief from a default judgment because the motion was untimely under Rule 60(b)(1) and the circumstances did not justify relief under Rule 60(b)(6) or (4).
• Bond Leather Co., Inc. v. Q.T. Shoe MFG. Co., Inc.
  764 F.2d 928· 1st Cir.· 1985-06-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that M.N., Inc. lacked sufficient minimum contacts with Massachusetts for personal jurisdiction under due process, but affirmed findings of fraud and statutory violations against Martin Nadler and Q-T.
• Blinder v. United States Sec. & Exch. Comm'n
  748 F.2d 1415· 10th Cir.· 1984-11-27 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court's dismissal of the injunction suit was proper because the underlying investigation order had terminated, rendering the claims moot. The denial of the Rule 60(b) motion was also affirmed, as counsel's tactical decisions at trial were binding
• Rebuck v. Vogel
  713 F.2d 484· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motions to introduce new evidence after judgment and that its findings regarding adverse possession were supported by substantial evidence.
• Lilly R. Vela and Lucretia Jackson v. W. Elec. Co.
  709 F.2d 375· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-11 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing a case as a sanction for a plaintiff's counsel's repeated failure to comply with discovery orders and court directives.
• Archer v. State
  166 So. 2d 163· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-07-01 ·cited 20×
  Harold Archer appeals from the denial of his second motion for relief under Florida Criminal Procedure Rule 1, challenging his 1960 guilty plea to burglary entered without counsel. The court reverses, holding that successive motions cannot be dismissed based on prior denials with
• Gonzalez v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Tr. Co. as Indenture Tr. for Am. Home Mortg. Inv. Tr. 2006-1
  95 So. 3d 251· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-04-20 ·cited 19×
  Elena Gonzalez appeals a summary judgment foreclosure order, challenging Deutsche Bank's standing to foreclose. The court reversed, finding a genuine issue of material fact exists regarding when Deutsche Bank obtained possession of the promissory note, which is essential to estab
• River Bridge Corp. v. Am. Somax Ventures
  76 So. 3d 986· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-11-30 ·cited 19×
  River Bridge Corporation appealed a judgment and attorney's fee award in favor of American Somax Ventures. The appellate court reversed 85% of the underlying judgment for breach of a right of first refusal claim due to speculative damages testimony. The court held that the trial
• First Cont'l Corp. v. Bashir H. Khan
  605 So. 2d 126· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-08-21 ·cited 19×
  First Continental Corporation appeals a default judgment entered in a landlord-tenant dispute over alleged breach of a commercial lease and failure to vacate. The court affirmed the judgment, holding that a landlord who obtained a judgment for double rent in county court was barr
• Skinner v. Skinner
  579 So. 2d 358· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-05-15 ·cited 19×
  In this divorce appeal, the court reversed an order granting the wife relief from a final judgment of dissolution and requiring the husband to pay a medical bill. The court held that interlocutory orders for temporary relief merge into and are extinguished by the final judgment w
• Gould v. Mut. Life Ins. Co. OF NEW York
  790 F.2d 769· 9th Cir.· 1986-05-28 ·cited 19×
  A district court's judgment may be upheld even if removal was improper, provided the court had original jurisdiction at the time of judgment entry, and prior determinations on jurisdiction are binding under the law of the case doctrine.
• Fla. Nat'l Bank v. Danuta T. Domanska
  486 So. 2d 1384· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-04-22 ·cited 19×
  Florida National Bank appeals an order granting Domanska leave to file an amended complaint after summary judgment was entered against her. The court reversed because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to permit amendment of pleadings after denying a motion for rehearing on the
• Pollock v. T & M Invs., Inc.
  420 So. 2d 99· Fla. 3d DCA· 1982-06-22 ·cited 19×
  This consolidated appeal addresses whether a trial court properly modified a final judgment requiring T & M Investments to pay monthly rental payments to Dr. Pollock after T & M claimed performance had become impossible due to inability to acquire surrounding properties for a pro
• Carollo v. Carollo
  920 So. 2d 16· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-12-29 ·cited 18×
  In this divorce case, the appellate court addressed the trial court's valuation and distribution of the husband's municipal pension (EORT), the denial of the husband's motion for rehearing after the pension was recalculated post-judgment, and the trial court's denial of the wife'
• Watson v. Internet Billing Co., Ltd.
  882 So. 2d 533· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-09-22 ·cited 18×
  A Florida appellate court affirmed a trial court's denial of a motion to vacate a clerk's default but reversed the entry of a default judgment, holding that the plaintiff's claims involved unliquidated damages and therefore the defaulted defendant was entitled to notice and an ev
• United States v. Parcel OF Land With Bldg.
  928 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1991-03-12 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the claimant's motion for relief from judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6), and affirmed the forfeiture.
• Goldome v. Davis
  567 So. 2d 909· Fla. 2d DCA· 1990-08-31 ·cited 18×
  Goldome appealed a trial court's decision to set aside a default judgment and writ of garnishment against Davis for failing to pay a promissory note. The appellate court reversed, holding that Davis's misunderstanding of the legal consequences of her inaction did not constitute e
• E.F. Hutton v. Sussman
  504 So. 2d 1372· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-04-07 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying relief from judgment to correct an oversight in reducing the compensatory damages award by the plaintiff's comparative negligence.
• In re Design Classics, Inc. v. Westphal
  788 F.2d 1384· 8th Cir.· 1986-04-21 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment was not an abuse of discretion, and thus affirmed the district court's decision.
• W. Indus., Inc. v. Newcor Canada Ltd.
  709 F.2d 16· 7th Cir.· 1983-06-13 ·cited 18×
  A timely filed Rule 59(e) motion divests the appellate court of jurisdiction over an appeal, even if filed after the notice of appeal.
• United States v. Forty-Eight Thousand
  705 F.2d 909· 7th Cir.· 1983-04-18 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion in denying the Rule 60(b) motion because the appellant presented a colorable defense and the circumstances warranted excusable neglect for the delay.
• Henry Church v. Strickland
  382 So. 2d 419· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-04-09 ·cited 18×
  This interlocutory appeal addresses whether a trial court properly set aside a partial summary judgment based on excusable neglect by substitute counsel who failed to discover admissions in the defendant's answer. The court affirmed the trial court's discretionary decision to vac
• Rodriguez v. S. Pac. Transp. Co.
  587 F.2d 980· 9th Cir.· 1978-11-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the dismissal order because the notice of appeal was untimely filed, and affirmed the denial of the motion to set aside the judgment.
• Terino Bros., Inc. v. Airey
  364 So. 2d 768· Fla. 2d DCA· 1978-10-13 ·cited 18×
  Terino Bros. sued Arthur Airey for breach of contract regarding repair of a trenchtrailer. The trial court set aside a default judgment against Airey after determining that his pro se letter responding to the complaint constituted a timely answer. The appellate court affirmed, ho
• French Renovating Co. v. RAY Renovating Co.
  170 F.2d 945· 6th Cir.· 1948-12-01 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court lacked jurisdiction over the state-law claims for breach of contract and trust when they were joined with federal patent and copyright claims, absent diversity of citizenship or sufficient amount in controversy, and when the claims did not r
• Cleveland v. Crown Fin., LLC
  212 So. 3d 1065· Fla. 1st DCA· 2017-03-01 ·cited 17×
  Crown Financial sought relief from a final judgment in a mortgage foreclosure case, claiming newly discovered evidence of an Agreement for Additional Advance that would increase the secured loan amount above $300,000. The appellate court reversed, holding that Crown failed to mee
• Hatton v. Barnett Bank OF Palm Beach Cnty.
  550 So. 2d 65· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-09-06 ·cited 17×
  In this deficiency judgment appeal, the court reversed the trial court's calculation of the deficiency amount owed after foreclosure of a second mortgage. The court held that the sale price from the judicial foreclosure must be credited against the debt, regardless of the mortgag