MORTON S. CORIN, M.D., APPELLANT,
v.
MARK GOLDBERG, M.D., APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2002-10-30
No. 3D02-50
Before SCHWÁRTZ, C.J., and RAMIREZ, J„ and NESBITT, Senior Judge.
829 So. 2d 943 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2002) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

It is apparent that the trial court mistakenly and erroneously entered judgment against a party, the appellant, Dr. Corin, individually, against whom no relief was sought in any existing pleading. See Milio v. Leinoff and Silvers, P.A., 668 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Koehler v. Roberts, 661 So. 2d 374 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Barkett v. Hardy, 571 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Antoniadis v. Earca, 442 So. 2d 1001 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), pet. for review denied, 451 So. 2d 847 (Fla.1984). His motion for rehearing below, which sought to remove him from the final judgment, should therefore have been granted and the cause is remanded to accomplish that task.

Reversed and remanded.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Gerry, 855 So. 2d 157 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)
    …eview of the trial court’s pretrial order excluding one of its witnesses from testifying at trial, cer-tiorari review is appropriate because the state has no right to a direct appeal in the event the defendant is acquitted. See State v. Scheuschner, 829 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); State v. Brown, 782 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Hence, in the instant case, the State properly challenges the trial court’s order through a petition for writ of certiorari. We next determine whether the trial court’s ruling…
  • State v. Martin, 982 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
    …a state witness from testifying at trial when the order substantially impairs the state’s ability to prosecute its case. State v. Pettis, 520 So. 2d 250 (Fla.1988); see, e.g. State v. Gerry, 855 So. 2d 157 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); State v. Scheuschner, 829 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); State v. Brown, 782 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). The trial court excluded Zapata from testifying finding that he had no relevant or admissible evidence to provide at trial. The court considered the sworn statement which Zapa…
  • Bradley v. Cooper, 40 So. 3d 846 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)
    …o find” for the respondent) (quoting Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587, 106 S.Ct. 1348, 89 L.Ed.2d 538 (1986)), we are constrained2 to reverse and remand this case for further proceedings. See State v. Scheuschner, 829 So. 2d 943, 944 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (finding the trial court violated clearly established principle of law when excluding testimony of State’s key witness upon a determination the testimony was “not worthy of belief’); State v. Nemeth, 581 So. 2d 627, 629 (Fla…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw