STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
D.H., A CHILD, APPELLEE
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
D.H., A CHILD, APPELLEE
920 So. 2d 689
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2006)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See A.W. v. State, 862 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); see also D.E.R. v. State, 744 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999).
GRIFFIN, THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Bank OF NEW York Mellon v. Est. of James D. Peterson, 208 So. 3d 1218 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…to relief under rule 1.540(b)(5). “The law is clear that something must have happened after the entry of final judgment that should ‘equitably limit[]’ the judgment’s application.” Second Sunrise Inv. Corp., 56 So. 3d at 86; see also Baker v. Baker, 920 So. 2d 689, 692 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (“[T]his court has held that the equities mentioned in the rule’s fifth ground are limited to ones that come to fruition after the final judgment.”). Here, the satisfaction of Bank of America’s mortgage was recorded in 2012,…
-
Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Second Sunrise Inv. Corp., 56 So. 3d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…ng must have happened after the entry of final judgment that should “equitably limit[ ]” the judgment’s application to satisfy this condition; here the alleged agreement occurred months before the October 30, 2007 final judgment. See Baker v. Baker, 920 So. 2d 689, 692 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (“[T]his court has held that the equities mentioned in the rule’s fifth ground are limited to ones that come to fruition after the final judgment.”); see also Brindle v. Brindle, 994 So. 2d 1174, 1176 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Hens…
-
Garcia v. Christiana Tr., 230 So. 3d 66 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…85-86 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (reiterating the clear legal principle that “something must have happened after the entry of final judgment ’ that should ‘equitably limit’ the judgment’s application” in order for rule 1.540(b)(5) to apply); Baker v. Baker, 920 So. 2d 689, 692 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (“[T]his court has held that the equities mentioned in [rule 1.540(b)(5)] are limited to ones that come to fruition after the final judgment.”). Here, Garcia did not allege below any new or changed, post-judgment circumstance…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- D.E.R. v. State, 744 So. 2d 1244 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- Hepburn v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 862 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- A.W. v. State, 862 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)