FLORIDA NATIONAL BANK, AS GUARDIAN OF THE PROPERTY OF MINETTE K. COACHMAN A/K/A MINNIE COACHMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
DANUTA T. DOMANSKA, APPELLEE
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.
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 final summary judgment.
The trial court lacked jurisdiction to permit the filing of an amended complaint after denying the plaintiff's motion for rehearing. A final judgment cannot be disturbed except through a properly filed motion for relief from judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540.
[1] A trial court loses jurisdiction of a case upon entering an order disposing of a petition for rehearing.
[2] After a trial court denies a motion for rehearing on a final summary judgment, it is without jurisdiction to permit the filing of a new complaint in the action.
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“trial court loses jurisdiction of case upon entering order disposing of petition for rehearing”
Establishes the fundamental jurisdictional principle that trial courts cannot act after denying a rehearing motion
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDomanska sued Florida National Bank, as guardian of Minnie Coachman's property, seeking compensation for services and care rendered to Mrs. Coachman. …
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 Florida Rule Of Civil Procedure 1.530 cases and more on FLexlaw
FERGUSON, Judge.
This appeal is brought by the defendant Florida National Bank from an order granting Domanska leave to file an amended complaint after the court had denied a rehearing on a final summary judgment for the defendant.
Plaintiff Domanska commenced this action against the Bank, as guardian of Minnie Coachman’s property, seeking compensation for services and care rendered to the ailing Mrs. Coachman during the last two years of her life.
On August 19, 1985, the court entered a final summary judgment in favor of the defendant Bank as to all claims. On or about August 28, 1985, Domanska filed a motion for rehearing and simultaneously filed a motion to file an amended complaint. On September 10, 1985, approximately twenty-two days after entry of the final summary judgment, the court denied the motion for rehearing. No appeal was taken. On September 25, 1985, the court entered an order granting the plaintiff’s motion to file an amended complaint, from which this appeal is brought. By the new complaint Domanska added a theory of implied contract to the theories of express contract and quantum meruit which were the bases of the original complaint.
The Bank contends that the trial court improperly permitted Domanska to defeat the summary judgment by altering previously filed pleadings where the matters she seeks to present by the amended complaint were available prior to the entry of final judgment.
We need not reach the question presented by the Bank since it appears conclusively from the record that the trial court was without jurisdiction to permit the filing of a new complaint in the action after it denied plaintiff’s motion for rehearing filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530. See Shelby Mutual Insurance Co. v. Pearson, 236 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1970) (trial court loses jurisdiction of case upon entering order disposing of petition for rehearing); Francisco v. Victoria Marine Shipping, Inc., 486 So. 2d 1386 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (same); St. Cloud Utilities v. Moore, 410 So. 2d 973, 974 n. 3 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (same). A final judgment cannot be disturbed by the trial court except on a properly filed motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540.1 Cf. Fiber Crete Homes, Inc. v. Division of Administration, De partment of Transportation, 315 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975) (trial court is without authority to entertain subsequent motion for rehearing after denial of a Rule 1.530 motion for new trial except on properly presented motion for relief from judgment).
Reversed and remanded.
. Relief from a judgment may be granted on grounds of (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial or rehearing; (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party; (4) a void judgment; or (5) a judgment which has been satisfied, released, or discharged. Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.540(b). There are no facts in the record which suggest that any of these grounds for relief exist.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cap. Bank v. The Honorable Francis X. Knuck, 537 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…after the appropriate disposition of the single authorized post-trial motion.2 Prohibition will therefore be granted to preclude its ongoing attempt to go further. Estate of Godley, 508 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Florida Nat’l Bank v. Domanska, 486 So. 2d 1384 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). PROHIBITION GRANTED.3 .The fact that the order was purportedly "without prejudice" does not affect this conclusion. Derma Lift Salon, Inc. v. Swanko, 419 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Gries Investment Co. v. Chelton, 388 So.…
-
Liberty Ins. Corp. v. Milne, 98 So. 3d 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…o rule on motion to amend; after summary judgment was entered and time for filing motion for rehearing and notice of appeal expired, there remained no action pending before the trial court on which to base an amendment); Fla. Nat’l Bank v. Domanska, 486 So. 2d 1384, 1385 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (reversing order granting plaintiffs motion to file an amended complaint adding new theories, filed along with his motion for rehearing after final judgment was entered; trial court was without jurisdiction to allow amended…
-
City OF Boca Raton v. Ross Hofmann Assocs., Inc., 501 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…t granted appellee’s previously filed motion to amend its complaint. We reverse on the ground that the court lost jurisdiction and had no authority to permit an amendment to the complaint after denial of rehearing. Florida National Bank v. Domanska, 486 So. 2d 1384 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). See also Shelby Mutual Insurance Co. v. Pearson, 236 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1970). A contrary rule, that finality awaits ruling upon a previously-filed motion to amend the pleadings, would introduce into judicial proceedings an element of…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Francisco v. Victoria Marine Shipping, Inc., 486 So. 2d 1386 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. OF Shelby v. Tillman Pearson, 236 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1970)
- Fiber Crete Homes, Inc. v. Division OF Administration, 315 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- ST. Cloud Utils. v. Erick S. Moore, 410 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)