NATHAN EDWARDS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR

Citator

Cited By (22 total)

• DeCLAIRE v. Yohanan, 453 So. 2d 375 (Fla. 1984)
  …it might have been tried and the parties are estopped to set up an intrinsic or direct fraud to vitiate the judgment, because the judgment is the highest evidence and cannot be contradicted by the parties to it. Johnson v. Wells, 72 Fla. 290, 299, 73 So. 188, 191 (1916) (citation omitted). The concept of fraud on the court has historically been limited in its application to ensure the finality of judgments and to avoid frequent attacks against final judgments. Prior, to the adoption of Florida Rule of…
• Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989)
  …factors set forth in the statute, neither a trial court nor a district court of appeal has the authority to overturn the award. The reasons underlying the need for finality of arbitration awards were expressed in Johnson v. Wells, 72 Fla. 290, 297; 73 So. 188, 190-91 (1916): The reason for the high degree of conclusiveness which attaches to an award made by arbitrators is that the parties have by agreement substituted a tribunal of their own choosing for the one provided and established by law, to the e…
• Foy Baxter and Annie Smith Baxter v. Royal Indem. Co., 285 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)
  …nce policy. However, it ignores the purpose of arbitration. Its object is to expedite and facilitate the settlement of disputes, thus avoiding the formalities, delay, expense, and vexation of ordinary litigation. Johnson v. Wells (1916) 72 Fla. 290, 73 So. 188. Appellee is not entitled to arbitration in the case at bar simply because there is no dispute to arbitrate. Given the facts assumed to exist by the trial court in its final judgment, I see no reason why an insurer’s insistence on arbitration before…