ERNEST MCDUFFIE, III, APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, 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.
McDuffie appeals a summary judgment foreclosure entered against him by the City of Jacksonville. The trial court subsequently vacated the judgment, but the appellate court held it lacked authority to do so once appellate jurisdiction was invoked, and affirmed the original foreclosure judgment.
The trial court was without authority to vacate the April 3, 1998 final summary judgment once appellate jurisdiction had been invoked. The appellate court has jurisdiction to review the April 3, 1998 order and affirms the foreclosure judgment, with leave to file a motion to correct the judgment on remand.
[1] A trial court lacks authority to vacate a final order after appellate jurisdiction has been invoked.
[2] A notice of appeal from a final judgment divests the trial court of jurisdiction to modify or vacate that judgment.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“the final summary judgment dated April 3, 1998 was a final order and that on June 29, 1998 the trial court was without authority to vacate, that order.”
Establishes that once a final judgment is entered, the trial court loses jurisdiction to vacate it after appeal is filed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceErnest McDuffie held an interest in real property that the City of Jacksonville sought to foreclose upon. On April 3, 1998, the trial court entered a …
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 Appealability Of Non-Final Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ernest McDuffie, doing business as D & M Contracting Company, appearing pro se, timely appeals a final summary judgment in favor of the City of Jacksonville, appellee, entered on April 3,1998 in appel-lee’s action for foreclosure of real property in which McDuffie held an interest. An attachment to appellant’s initial brief reflects that the April 3, 1998 final summary judgment was vacated by the trial court on June 29, 1998. Thereafter, the City filed a second amended complaint in the same action and, on November 24,1998, the trial court entered final judgment on that second amended complaint. The City indicates in its answer brief that the April 3, 1998 foreclosure judgment was vacated because it contained an incorrect legal description of the subject property. Appellant has neither filed a notice of appeal with regard to the November 24, 1998 judgment nor sought to amend his notice of appeal. Sua sponte, this court ordered appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed because the order before this court was not a final order or an appealable non-final order. Upon review of appellant’s response to the order to show cause and the record on appeal, we conclude that the final summary judgment dated April 3, 1998 was a final order and that on June 29, 1998 the trial court was without authority to vacate, that order. See First Union Nat’l Bank of Florida v. Yost, 622 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)(relief from judgment due to mistake, newly discovered evidence, and so on, may not be obtained if appellate jurisdiction has been invoked); Georges v. Insurance Technicians, Inc., 486 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)(pendency of appeal from final judgment removed trial court’s jurisdiction to grant motion to vacate a judgment). Thus, we have jurisdiction to review the April 3, 1998 order. On review of the order on appeal, finding no merit to the arguments presented, we affirm the final summary judgment of foreclosure entered on April 3, 1998. Our affirmance, however, is without prejudice to the filing of a motion to correct the judgment on remand.. See Rule 1.540(a), Fla. R. Civ. P. AFFIRMED.
KAHN, WEBSTER AND VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shedrick Staten v. Celso M. Gonzalez-Falla for the Gilman Article III Tr., 855 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…of jurisdiction to determine the metes and bounds of the easement necessarily renders the order nonfinal because the issue is not collateral to the action nor does it merely require a ministerial act. See generally McDuffie v. City of Jacksonville, 763 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (holding trial court lacked jurisdiction to vacate final order to correct legal description once appellate jurisdiction had been invoked). Additionally, such an order may not be “deemed” final pursuant to McGurn v. Scott, 596 So.…
-
Freddy Caicedo v. Ospina (11th Cir. Ct. App. Div. 2014)
Authorities Cited
- First Union Nat'l Bank OF Fla. v. Yost, 622 So. 2d 111 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Georges v. Ins. Technicians, Inc., 486 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)