Nunc Pro Tunc Order

729 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 109 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Tosha Gray v. State
  915 So. 2d 254· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-12-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a trial court must attach record support for denying a motion to correct an illegal sentence, especially when the sentence modification involves adding a minimum mandatory term after service has begun.
• Espinoza v. State
  821 So. 2d 379· Fla. 3d DCA· 2002-07-10 ·cited 4×
  Pedro Pablo Espinoza appeals the trial court's imposition of an upward departure sentence at resentencing following the declaration of the 1995 sentencing guidelines unconstitutional. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal reverses, holding that a trial judge cannot impose an
• THE Florida BAR v. Arnold
  767 So. 2d 438· Fla.· 2000-08-24 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Bar sought to discipline attorney David Carlton Arnold following his felony conviction for engaging in monetary transactions in property derived from unlawful activity. The Florida Supreme Court approved the referee's recommendation of a sixty-day suspension rather th
• Crapp v. Crim. Just. Standards & Training Comm'n
  753 So. 2d 787· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-03-29 ·cited 4×
  An appellate court lacks jurisdiction if the notice of appeal is not timely filed, and jurisdiction cannot be conferred by court action or stipulation.
• Gaines v. Sayne
  727 So. 2d 351· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-02-19 ·cited 4×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  Eugene Gaines appealed a final divorce judgment, arguing the decree was not final because his wife had a pending motion for rehearing on financial issues when she died. The Florida District Court of Appeal held that the portion of the judgment dissolving the marriage was sufficie
• Valrio v. State
  700 So. 2d 668· Fla.· 1997-10-09 ·cited 4×
  A downward departure sentence may be affirmed where the trial court orally pronounced valid reasons for departure at the time of sentencing but inadvertently failed to enter contemporaneous written reasons.
• State v. Clary
  694 So. 2d 108· Fla. 5th DCA· 1997-05-23 ·cited 4×
  A trial court must provide contemporaneous written reasons for a downward departure sentence, and a nunc pro tunc order does not cure a failure to do so at sentencing.
• Robinson v. Tootalian
  691 So. 2d 52· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-04-09 ·cited 4×
  David Robinson appeals the probate court's removal of him as co-trustee of his brother's estate, claiming insufficient evidence. The court affirmed the removal, finding that the irreconcilable conflict between Robinson and his co-trustee Marilyn over trust administration, particu
• Freeman W. Barner, Jr. v. Barner
  673 So. 2d 886· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-05-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an appeal filed after an oral ruling on a motion for rehearing, but before a written order, is premature and thus dismissed.
• Arnett v. State
  626 So. 2d 308· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-11-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in failing to grant additional credit for time served because the resentencing order was made nunc pro tunc to the original sentencing date.
• In re Cont'l Airlines Corp. v. AIR Line Pilots Ass'n
  907 F.2d 1500· 5th Cir.· 1990-07-25 ·cited 4×
  The bankruptcy court lacked the authority under Bankruptcy Rule 9019(a) or its general equitable powers to modify the labor provisions of a settlement agreement negotiated by a union and airline, as such modifications were unrelated to the success of the reorganization and underm
• United States v. Pilar Villapudua-Perada
  896 F.2d 1154· 9th Cir.· 1990-02-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the thirty-day period for the district court to modify its dismissal order was tolled while the defendant was a fugitive, thus the court retained jurisdiction to reinstate the conviction.
• THE Florida BAR v. Eisenberg
  555 So. 2d 353· Fla.· 1989-12-21 ·cited 4×
  The Court held that the referee properly considered mitigating evidence in recommending disbarment, and the recommended discipline was appropriate.
• Figone v. Honorable Brandt C. Downey, III
  547 So. 2d 697· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-08-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a trial court acted without jurisdiction when it reduced a prison sentence and placed a defendant on community control after a notice of appeal was filed.
• Williamson v. Geneva, Inc.
  550 So. 2d 8· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-06-23 ·cited 4×
  Appellants Williamson and Superior Swim Systems challenged trial court orders that retroactively reinstated an injunction preventing Williamson from using a customer list obtained during her employment at Geneva, Inc. The court held that nunc pro tunc orders were improper because
• Local 1545 v. Inland Steel Coal Co.
  876 F.2d 1288· 7th Cir.· 1989-06-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that prior arbitration awards are generally not enforced prospectively by courts unless specific egregious circumstances are alleged, and that the union failed to demonstrate such circumstances.
• United States v. Aviles-Alvarez
  868 F.2d 1108· 9th Cir.· 1989-03-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's finding that a pretrial discovery motion remained pending was not clearly erroneous, thus tolling the Speedy Trial Act clock and affirming the conviction.
• Bickowski v. State
  530 So. 2d 470· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-09-01 ·cited 4×
• Brock v. The Scheuner Corp.
  841 F.2d 151· 6th Cir.· 1988-03-08 ·cited 4×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  The court held that a settlement agreement was reached, but the district court erred in altering agreed-upon payment terms and awarding attorneys' fees to the Secretary.
• Manko v. United States
  830 F.2d 831· 8th Cir.· 1987-09-25 ·cited 4×
  The court affirmed the district court's finding of causation and most damage awards, but remanded for a limited factual inquiry regarding lost pension earnings. The wife's claim for loss of consortium was dismissed as time-barred.
• Krull v. The Celotex Corp.
  827 F.2d 80· 7th Cir.· 1987-08-13 ·cited 4×
  A written opinion memorializing a prior oral ruling, issued within a reasonable time and without substantive alteration after a case is dismissed, may be considered nunc pro tunc and is thus valid.
• Ziebart Int'l Corp. v. After Mkt. Assocs.
  802 F.2d 220· 7th Cir.· 1986-09-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that there was no likelihood of confusion between Ziebart's and Protector's marks, and thus no trademark infringement.
• Diaz v. The Pub. Health Tr. OF Dade Cnty.
  492 So. 2d 1082· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-06-03 ·cited 4×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's dismissal of a medical malpractice action for failure to prosecute, holding that the court abused its discretion by waiting eleven months to vacate a stay order and dismiss the case after plaintiffs had relied on the s
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Caronia
  395 So. 2d 1221· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-03-24 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a homeowners insurance policy exclusion for 'land vehicles' applied to a motorcycle, thus denying coverage.
• United States v. Boydston
  622 F.2d 398· 8th Cir.· 1980-06-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a defendant is ineligible for sentencing under the Young Adult Offenders Act if they have passed their twenty-sixth birthday at the time of conviction, and nunc pro tunc sentencing is not permitted to circumvent this statutory limit.
• Demetri Thor v. United States
  554 F.2d 759· 5th Cir.· 1977-06-24 ·cited 4×
  The failure of the Attorney General to strictly adhere to the statutory timetable for republishing the schedules of controlled substances does not invalidate the schedules or render a conviction based upon them void.
• United States ex rel. James Willie Cleveland 28598 v. Warden, N.J. State Prison
  544 F.2d 1200· 3d Cir.· 1976-11-11 ·cited 4×
  The court held that denying a free trial transcript to an indigent defendant not sentenced to death, when a transcript is necessary for appeal, violates equal protection rights established in Griffin v. Illinois.
• In re Laurent Watch Co., Inc. v. United States
  539 F.2d 1231· 9th Cir.· 1976-07-12 ·cited 4×
  A nunc pro tunc order appointing counsel for a debtor in possession is not barred by Beecher v. Leavenworth State Bank when the referee made the required determinations before the services were rendered.
• Surratt v. Fleming
  322 So. 2d 39· Fla. 1st DCA· 1975-10-27 ·cited 4×
  Florida appellate court reversed the trial court's vacation of a judicial sale, holding that mere inadequacy of price alone cannot set aside a judicial sale without additional circumstances supporting unjust enrichment.
• United States ex rel. Larry David Hayden v. Zelker
  506 F.2d 1228· 2d Cir.· 1974-11-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a savings clause in the revised penal law constitutionally allows application of the old sentencing scheme to offenses committed before the revision, even if it results in longer potential incarceration than under the new law.
• Venable v. Meyers
  500 F.2d 1215· 9th Cir.· 1974-07-16 ·cited 4×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  The court held that the entry of judgment nunc pro tunc was appropriate and that the denial of leave to appeal in forma pauperis was not an abuse of discretion.
• Chinese Mar. Tr., Ltd. v. Carolina Shipping Co.
  456 F.2d 192· 4th Cir.· 1972-03-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the contributory negligence of a longshoreman is imputed to his stevedore, constituting a breach of the warranty of workmanlike performance, entitling the shipowner to indemnification when the vessel is free of fault.
• THE Florida BAR v. Pritikin
  259 So. 2d 138· Fla.· 1972-02-23 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an additional two-year suspension for misappropriation of escrow funds should run concurrently with a prior three-year suspension, considering the tardy prosecution.
• State v. Stallworth
  251 So. 2d 847· Fla.· 1970-10-14 ·cited 4×
• Stallworth v. State
  237 So. 2d 328· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-06-30 ·cited 4×
  David Stallworth appealed his sentence, arguing that a 14-month delay between conviction and sentencing violated due process. The Florida appellate court agreed the delay was improper but upheld the sentence, requiring that it be corrected to run from the original conviction date
• Suggs v. Wilson
  403 F.2d 52· 9th Cir.· 1968-11-13 ·cited 4×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Correction
  The court held that a defendant's sentence had not commenced and the trial court could correct a clerical error in the degree of the offense nunc pro tunc without violating double jeopardy protections.
• Glouser v. United States
  340 F.2d 436· 8th Cir.· 1965-01-15 ·cited 4×
  A district court loses jurisdiction to grant probation after a defendant has commenced serving their sentence, and a subsequent order attempting to do so is void.
• Larson v. Harrison
  142 So. 2d 727· Fla.· 1962-06-13 ·cited 4×
• Toyer v. United States
  291 F.2d 925· 8th Cir.· 1961-06-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in correcting a clerical error in the judgment to conform to the oral sentencing pronouncement.
• Feener Bus. Schs., Inc. v. Speedwriting Publ'g Co., Inc.
  249 F.2d 609· 1st Cir.· 1957-11-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in allowing the parent corporation to be substituted as plaintiff nunc pro tunc after a merger.
• Test v. State
  87 So. 2d 587· Fla.· 1956-04-18 ·cited 4×
  In this bond validation appeal, the Florida Supreme Court upheld a trial court's entry of a supplemental decree amending a municipal parking bond validation decree after the appellate mandate was filed. The Court held that trial courts retain authority to amend their own decrees
• Barkeij v. Ford Motor Co.
  230 F.2d 729· 9th Cir.· 1956-01-13 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a plaintiff's failure to comply with appellate rules, even when seeking to proceed in forma pauperis, warrants dismissal of the appeal, especially when the trial court has certified the appeal as frivolous.
• Jira v. Weber
  201 F.2d 914· C.C.P.A.· 1953-02-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Board of Interference Examiners correctly found that the senior party's (Weber et al.) patent application disclosure was sufficient and that the junior party (Jira) failed to provide adequate corroboration for his claimed earlier conception and reduction t
• Compania de Navegacion Transmar v. Ga. Hardwood Lumber Co. the Kotor
  141 F.2d 652· 5th Cir.· 1944-04-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant's actions, combined with the district judge's understanding and subsequent orders, constituted a timely application for appeal, and that the evidence of railroad weights was sufficient to establish excess weight.
• Walton Land & Timber Co. v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co.
  72 Fla. 66· Fla.· 1916-07-07 ·cited 4×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  Walton Land & Timber Company sued Louisville & Nashville Railroad for damages to a mule shipped as livestock that died from injuries sustained during transportation. The court reversed the trial court's judgment dismissing the action, holding that the shipper presented sufficient
• Wilson v. Matheson
  17 Fla. 630· Fla.· 1880-01-01 ·cited 4×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  Wilson and McHenry purchased a judgment against the Standley estate at a sale under execution, claiming a lien on lands the complainant Wilson had purchased from the estate's administratrix. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decree enjoining their sale, holding
• Ramsay v. State
  259 So. 3d 132· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-11-14 ·cited 3×
  The defendant appealed his conviction and sentence, arguing that the trial court erred by failing to conduct a competency hearing after ordering a competency evaluation. The state conceded the error but argued for remand to conduct a nunc pro tunc competency determination rather
• THE Florida BAR v. Madsen Marcellus, Jr.
  249 So. 3d 538· Fla.· 2018-07-19 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a disciplinary case against attorney Madsen Marcellus, Jr., who committed professional misconduct during personal divorce proceedings, including forging his ex-wife's signature on a mortgage modification, failing to comply with family court orde
• Semerena v. Aetna Health
  248 So. 3d 230· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-05-16 ·cited 3×
  A trial court loses jurisdiction to enter a dismissal order upon a plaintiff's filing of a notice of voluntary dismissal under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.420(a)(1), regardless of whether the court had orally pronounced the dismissal decision before the notice was filed.
• Saunders v. State
  242 So. 3d 1149· Fla. 4th DCA· 2018-04-18 ·cited 3×
  A trial court commits fundamental error when it appoints an expert to evaluate a defendant's competence but fails to hold a competency hearing or make an independent determination of competence. The remedy depends on whether a nunc pro tunc competency determination can be made ba