WILLIAM CARSON, APPELLANT,
v.
ROBIN GIBSON, 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.
Carson appealed a summary judgment in favor of his former attorney Gibson in a fee dispute, arguing the trial court improperly took judicial notice of records from a separate charging lien proceeding without proper evidentiary foundation. The appellate court agreed and reversed, holding that judicial notice of another case's records requires either the actual file or certified copies to be introduced as evidence.
Yes. The trial court lacked authority to take judicial notice of records from a different case pending or disposed of in the same court but outside the record before it. To prove matter contained in another case's record, a party must either offer the actual court file or certified copies into evidence; a stipulation alone does not provide sufficient evidentiary basis for judicial notice.
[1] A trial court cannot take judicial notice of records from a different case pending or disposed of in the same court if those records are not part of the current case's re…
[2] To prove a matter contained in the record of another case, a party must offer the other court file or certified copies of portions thereof into evidence in the case being…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“It is well settled that the trial court is not authorized to take judicial notice of the records in a different case pending or disposed of in the same court but outside the record in the case before it.”
Establishes the foundational rule preventing judicial notice of external case records
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarson retained attorney Gibson to represent him in a contract and royalties dispute with Petersen & Petersen Industries. After the underlying case wa…
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 Professional Malpractice cases and more on FLexlaw
RYDER, Judge.
William Carson challenges a final judgment entered in favor of Robin Gibson, arguing that the trial court incorrectly applied the estoppel by judgment doctrine. We agree.
This professional malpractice action arose out of an invention royalties and contract litigation between Carson, represented by Gibson, and Petersen & Petersen Industries. Following its settlement during mediation, disputes arose between Carson and Gibson concerning the amount of Gibson’s contingent fee. The trial court conducted a charging lien hearing, and later entered its order.1 Subsequently, Carson filed the instant action, and the trial court’s ultimate entry of summary final judgment in favor of Gibson is the subject of this appeal.
Carson raises numerous issues on appeal. Disposing of the first issue on appeal is all we need discuss.
Appellant argues that because the charging lien proceeding was never made a part of the trial court record, the trial court erred in taking judicial notice of it to make the requisite findings for estoppel by judgment. It is well settled that the trial court is not authorized to take judicial notice of the records in a different case pending or disposed of in the same court but outside the record in the case before it. Kostecos v. Johnson, 85 So. 2d 594 (Fla.1956); Bergeron Land Development, Inc. v. Knight, 307 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Novack v. Novack, 196 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 3rd DCA), cert. denied, 196 So. 2d 926 (Fla.1967).
The record on appeal shows that appellee attached to his motion for summary judgment an affidavit comparing quotes from portions of the charging lien proceeding with those from the instant case. Copies, not certified, of the amended pretrial stipulation, the final judgment, the initial and reply briefs and the per curiam opinion of the district court were also attached. In order to prove some matter contained in the record of a case other than the one being litigated, a party must offer the other court file or certified copies of portions thereof into evidence in the case then being litigated. Bergeron Land Development, Inc.
Appellee argues that he has satisfied the requirements of sections 90.208 and 90.204, Florida Statutes (1989), by stipulating to the judicial notice requested by Carson. A stipulation alone, however, does not provide the evidentiary basis for judicial notice of evidence not otherwise properly before the court. See Kostecos.
We conclude that the trial court erred in relying on the papers presented to him to take judicial notice of the proceedings in the other case.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Reversed and remanded.
SCHOONOVER, C.J., and PARKER, J., concur. . Carson v. Petersen, 566 So. 2d 796, per curiam affirmed (Fla. 2d DCA), writ of mandamus denied, 569 So. 2d 1278 (Fla.1990).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carson v. Gibson, 638 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…lliam Carson appeals a final summary judgment entered in favor of the defendant, Robin Gibson. In an earlier appeal, we reversed a similar summary judgment because the trial court improperly relied on documents from another record. Carson v. Gibson, 595 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). On remand, the relevant materials were properly added to the record and the trial court again entered a summary judgment. We affirm the judgment because the issues that Mr. Carson raises in his malpractice complaint are issues th…
-
Krishin P. Abichandani v. Related Homes OF Tampa, Inc., 696 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)….. In order to prove some matter contained in the record of a case other than the one being litigated, a party must offer the other court file or certified copies of portions thereof into evidence in the case then being litigated. Carson v. Gibson, 595 So. 2d 175, 176-77 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). Thus, for the trial court in the case before us to know of the issues in the trespass suit, certified copies of the relevant documents from the record in that case, or the court file, must have been presented to the trial…
-
Ingram v. Ingram, 625 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…DAUKSCH, Judge, dissenting, concurring. I respectfully dissent. In my opinion appellee was entitled to an award of attorney’s fees based upon ease law from this court. Rey v. Rey, 598 So. 2d 141, 146 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Purdy v. Purdy, [*123] 595 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). In all other respects I concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Kostecos v. Johnson, 85 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 1956)
- Novack v. Novack, 196 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)
- Bergeron Land Dev., Inc. v. Knight, 307 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- Battisti v. Staples, 196 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1967)
- Bretti v. Turner, 196 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1967)