LESTER B. NICHOLS, APPELLANT,
v.
MICHAEL D. EICHOLTZ ENTERPRISES, INC., ETC., 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.
A writ of execution is not permitted on a judgment that does not finally determine the rights and liabilities of the parties.
The trial court denied a motion to stay a sheriff's sale ordered by a writ of execution. The underlying judgment was for quantum meruit, but a compuls…
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 Writ Of Execution cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
The issue in this appeal concerns whether a writ of execution, pursuant to which a sheriffs sale was ordered, is based upon a final judgment. We find that it is not and reverse the trial court’s order denying the defendant’s motion for order staying sale.
Execution is only permitted on judgments which determine with finality the rights and liabilities of parties. Shakarian v. Daum, 561 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Here the judgment on quantum meruit is not a final judgment because: (1) it lacks language typically associated with entry of a final money judgment such as “for which sums let execution issue,” and (2) more importantly, the judgment does not end the judicial labor in the cause as the defendant’s compulsory counterclaim for damages arising out of the filing of an alleged fraudulent lien has not been adjudicated.1 The order denying stay is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings including entry of a final judgment.
REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.
DAUKSCH and GOSHORN, JJ., concur. . The defendant's claim that the judgment is not final because, while it awards attorney’s fees and costs, it fails to adjudicate these amounts, is without merit. See Morand v. Stoneburner, 516 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Caufield v. Gino Cantele and Armando Cantele, 745 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…; South Atlantic S.S. Co. of Delaware v. Tutson, 139 Fla. 405, 190 So. 675 (1939). . See Bowman v. Corbett, 556 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). . Kippy Corp. v. Colburn, 177 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 1965); Nichols v. Michael D. Eicholtz Enterprises, Inc., 706 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 5th DCA [*435] 1998); City of Tallahassee v. Big Bend PBA, 703 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). . Compare D.S. Ware Co., Inc. v. Green, 696 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). . Sholkoff v. Boca Raton Community Hospital Inc., 693 So. 2d 1114, 11…
-
Charter Schs. USA, Inc. v. John DOE NO. 93, 152 So. 3d 657 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)…blish “finality” as a prerequisite for execution on a judgment and for an appeal from a judgment. “Execution is only permitted on judgments which determine with finality the rights and liabilities of parties.” Nichols v. Michael D. Eicholtz Enters., 706 So. 2d 70, 70 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (citing Shakarian v. Daum, 561 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)). Florida courts are now less concerned with the' caption on the judgment or the incantation “for which let execution issue”12 than with an assessment of whether a…
-
Ornentha James Hodges, Sr. v. State, 800 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…this credit. We find appellant’s claim to be without factual support or legal merit. See, e.g., Kronz v. State, 462 So. 2d 450, 451 (Fla.1985); Mattern v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 707 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Hightower v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 706 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Inclima v. State, 625 So. 2d 978 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). AFFIRMED. PLEUS and PALMER, JJ., concur. . The legislature enacted the control release program, effective September 1, 1990, “to provide a better, more tailored method of…
Authorities Cited
- Charles Morand, M.D. v. Stoneburner, 516 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Cont'l Ins. Co. v. Nunez, 516 So. 2d 270 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Lois v. Shakarian and David H. Lucas, 561 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)