HENDERSON SHUFFLER, PETITIONER,
v.
BASCOM PALMER EYE INSTITUTE, RESPONDENT

Fla. 3d DCA | 1985-11-05
No. 85-1513
Before HUBBART, BASKIN and JOR-GENSON, JJ.
478 So. 2d 418 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1985)

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.

Synopsis

Petitioner Henderson Shuffler sought certiorari review of a trial court order striking his demand for jury trial. The Florida Third District Court of Appeal held that when a plaintiff's complaint is amended to exceed county court jurisdictional limits and the case is transferred to circuit court, the plaintiff may file a timely jury trial demand anew in the circuit court action, and the trial court erred in striking that demand.


Holding

Yes. When a complaint is amended with leave of court to allege damages exceeding county court jurisdictional limits and the action is transferred to circuit court, the amended complaint creates a new action, and the plaintiff may file a timely jury trial demand in the circuit court action pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.430(b). The trial court erred in striking this timely demand.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court order striking a jury trial demand may be reviewed by certiorari if it constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law.

[2] A timely demand for a jury trial is proper in a new action filed in circuit court after a complaint is amended to allege damages exceeding the county court's jurisdiction…

Previewing 2 of 4 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

Key Quotes

“the cause became a new action when the complaint was amended, with leave of court, to allege damages in excess of the jurisdictional limit of the county court, see § 34.01(l)(c)2, Fla. Stat. (1983), and the action was transferred to the circuit court”

Establishes that amendment exceeding jurisdictional limits and transfer to circuit court creates a new action, allowing a fresh jury trial demand

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Shuffler filed a complaint in county court but failed to timely demand a jury trial under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.430(b), thereby waiving th…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

This is an original petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review of a trial court order striking the plaintiff/petitioner Henderson Shuffler’s demand for a jury trial filed below. We have jurisdiction to entertain this petition if the trial court’s order constitutes a departure from essential requirements of law. Valiante v. Allstate Insurance Co., 462 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Magram v. Raffel, 443 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Spring v. Ronel Refining, Inc., 421 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Art. V, § 4(b)(3), Fla. Const.

We conclude that the petition for certiorari should be granted and the order under review quashed, upon a holding that it was a departure from the essential requirements of law to strike the demand for jury trial herein. Although the plaintiff Shuffler waived his right to a jury trial in the county court action he filed below when he failed to file a timely demand for same under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.430(b), the cause became a new action when the complaint was amended, with leave of court, to allege damages in excess of the jurisdictional limit of the county court, see § 34.01(l)(c)2, Fla. Stat. (1983), and the action was transferred to the circuit court. At that point, the plaintiff Shuffler properly filed a timely demand for a jury trial along with his amended complaint pursuant to Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.430(b) in the new circuit court action. In our view, the trial court erred in thereafter striking this timely demand. See Hollywood, Inc. v. City of Hollywood, 321 So. 2d 65 (Fla.1975).

The petition for a writ of certiorari is granted, the order under review is quashed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court with directions to reinstate the subject demand for a jury trial.

It is so ordered.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw