RICHARD BETTEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
THE CITY OF MIAMI, 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.
Richard Bettez appealed a summary judgment in favor of the City of Miami in his false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution action. The Florida appellate court affirmed, holding that police had probable cause to arrest Bettez based on witness reports and his own battery of an auxiliary officer.
The trial court had inherent authority to reconsider its interlocutory ruling denying summary judgment, and summary judgment was appropriate because police had probable cause to arrest Bettez based on witness reports of aggravated battery and his own battery of an auxiliary officer.
[1] A trial court possesses inherent authority to reconsider its interlocutory rulings prior to the entry of a final judgment or order.
[2] A motion mislabeled as a motion for rehearing may be treated as a proper motion for reconsideration if its substance so indicates.
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“a trial court has inherent authority to reconsider, as here, any of its interlocutory rulings prior to the entry of a final judgment or final order in the cause”
Establishes the trial court's authority to reconsider its denial of summary judgment despite the procedural defect in labeling
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePolice officers responding to an incident were informed by witnesses that Bettez had committed an aggravated battery on a civilian. While investigatin…
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 False Arrest cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the plaintiff Richard Bettez from an adverse final summary judgment entered below in a false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution action. We affirm based on the following briefly stated legal analysis.
First, we reject the plaintiff’s contention that the trial court had no authority to entertain the defendant City of Miami’s motion to reconsider the trial court’s prior interlocutory ruling denying the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and to thereafter enter a summary judgment for the defendant. It is well settled in this state that a trial court has inherent authority to reconsider, as here, any of its interlocutory rulings prior to the entry of a final judgment or final order in the cause. The fact that the defendant mislabeled his motion as a motion for rehearing under Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.530 cannot change this result as the motion was, in substance, a proper motion for reconsideration. See Alabama Hotel Co. v. J.L. Mott Iron Works, 86 Fla. 608, 98 So. 825 (1924); Margulies v. Levy, 439 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Nelson v. Cravero Constructors, Inc., 117 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); see also Commercial Garden Mall v. Success Academy, Inc., 453 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).
Second, the record demonstrates, without dispute, that the arresting police officers were informed by witnesses to the subject incident that the plaintiff had committed an aggravated battery on a civilian; moreover, the plaintiff, without material dispute, committed a battery on an auxiliary police officer while the arresting officers were investigating the incident. This being so, the police had ample probable cause to arrest the plaintiff and, subsequently, to seek to have the plaintiff criminally prosecuted; a summary judgment for the defendant City of Miami was, therefore, entirely appropriate in this case. See DeMarie v. Jefferson Stores, Inc., 442 So. 2d 1014, 1017 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Crawford v. State, 334 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Salas v. State, 246 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971).
The final summary judgment under review is, in all respects,
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (29 total)
-
del Castillo v. Ralor Pharmacy, Inc., 512 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…e all non-final orders, it is deemed to have merged into, and is properly reviewable on appeal from the appropriate later final judgment. Auto Owners Ins. Co. v. Hillsborough County Aviation Auth., 153 So. 2d 722 (Fla.1963); Bettez v. City of Miami, 510 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Saul v. Basse, 399 So. 2d at 130; Johnson v. Johnson, 674 P. 2d 539 (Okla.1983); Tunnell v. Otis Elevator Co., 404 S.W. 2d 307 (Tex.1966). The troublesome aspect of this case is that there are two papers which may qualify as the…
-
Hunter v. Dennies Contracting Co., Inc., 693 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…econsider any of its nonfinal rulings, and, if it deems it appropriate, to alter or retract them. However, the court is not required to exercise that authority, and its decisions whether to do so generally are not renewable. Bettez v. City of Miami, 510 So. 2d 1242, 1243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Arnold v. Massebeau, 493 So. 2d 91, 92 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). The rule differs with respect to a temporary injunction issued without prior notice, in which case the trial court must hear the enjoined party’s motion to dissol…
-
Seigler v. Bell, 148 So. 3d 473 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)…3d DCA 1998) (treating a motion that was “mislabeled” a motion for “reconsideration” as a rule 1.530 motion for “rehearing” because it was aimed at a final order (citing Rebholz v. Floyd, 327 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976))); Bettez v. City of Miami, 510 So. 2d 1242,1243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (treating a motion that was “mislabeled” a motion for “rehearing under [rule] 1.530” as a motion for “reconsideration” because it was aimed at an interlocutory ruling (citing Alabama Hotel Co. v. J.L. Mott Iron Works, 86 Fla.…
Previewing 3 of 29 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ala. Hotel Co. v. The J. L. Mott Iron Works, 86 Fla. 608 (Fla. 1923)
- Salas v. State, 246 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Nelson v. Cravero Constructors, Inc., 117 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)
- Crawford v. State, 334 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)
- Margulies v. The Honorable David L. Levy, 439 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Travelers Indem. Co. OF Am. v. Se. Commc'ns, Inc., 453 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Commercial Garden Mall v. The Success Acad., Inc., 453 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)
- DeMARIE v. Jefferson Stores, Inc., 442 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)