ARDC-HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT, INC., TOWN CENTER INVESTMENT ASSOCIATES, JMB REALTY CORPORATION, CENTER PARTNERS LIMITED, AND CPL/TCA, APPELLANTS,
v.
ALEX RANDELL, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Nunc Pro Tunc Order cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order vacating an earlier final summary judgment. The order was entered in response to a motion filed pursuant to rule 1.540, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The applicable subsection of the rule has not been specified. The ostensible reason for entry of the order is that one of the original defendants was unintentionally omitted from the final summary judgment. There is no evidentiary support in the record for that proposition. It rests, instead, on the argument of counsel and the recollection of the trial court judge. That is an insufficient basis for vacating an otherwise final judgment. Lee v. Chung, 528 So. 2d 1313 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). Even if there had been a sufficient evidentiary showing, however, the more appropriate remedy would have been to add the unintentionally omitted party by an order nunc pro tunc the final judgment, rather than vacating that final judgment and disturbing vested interests.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
HERSEY, GUNTHER and POLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blimpie Cap. Venture, Inc. v. Palms Plaza P'rs, Ltd., 636 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…motion filed under rule 1.540(b) that is not supported by evidence at a hearing is insufficient to justify the setting aside of a final judgment valid on its face, thereby overturning -vested interests. ARDC-Hospitality Management, Inc. v. Randell, 620 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). We also emphasize again that, in the absence of a stipulation, the proof necessary to support the granting of such a motion cannot be supplied by argument or objected to representations of counsel. Affirmed. FRANK, C.J., and A…
-
Wilson v. State, 685 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…he conviction. We remand, however, for further proceedings with respect to sentencing. The record on appeal does not contain a sentencing guidelines scoresheet. Preparation and review of a scoresheet was mandatory in this case. See Linen v. State, 620 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). We therefore remand for further proceedings to determine if a scoresheet was prepared for sentencing. If it is established that a scoresheet was prepared and the appellant was sentenced consistently therewith, nothing further nee…
-
Haywood v. State, 659 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…ewd and lascivious act (count VI), and child abuse (count VII). Because Haywood was sentenced on these noncapital offenses without a sentencing guidelines score-sheet, we reverse and remand for resentenc-ing on counts VI and VII. See Linen v. State, 620 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). We are required to reverse Haywood’s convictions on counts III, TV, and V (engaging a child in sexual activity) because the state failed to present a prima facie case. The record contains absolutely no evidence to support crimi…
Authorities Cited
- Hyun LEE and Oh Hi Lee v. Su Shin Chung and Yang Soon Chung, 528 So. 2d 1313 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)