THE HAVEN CENTER, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
HOMERO MERUELO, 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.
Haven Center appeals a summary judgment on its counterclaims against Meruelo, challenging the trial court's addition of finality language ('go hence without day') when the underlying declaratory judgment and specific performance claims remained pending. The appellate court reversed the finality language because compulsory counterclaims cannot be finally adjudicated until the original claims are resolved on the merits.
The court reversed the portion of the judgment containing the finality language ('go hence without day') because compulsory counterclaims cannot be finally adjudicated until the original cause has been fully disposed of on the merits. However, the reversal did not disturb the summary judgment on the counterclaim itself.
[1] A judgment adjudicating compulsory counterclaims is not appealable until a final disposition of the original cause has been obtained on the merits.
[2] A trial court may not enter a judgment that purports to be final as to a counterclaim when the plaintiff's original claims remain pending and arise from the same contract…
Previewing 2 of 4 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 adjudication of compulsory counterclaims such as these is 'not appeal-able until a final disposition of the original cause has obtained on the merits.'”
Establishes the rule that compulsory counterclaims cannot be finally adjudicated before the original claims are resolved.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHaven Center filed counterclaims against Homero Meruelo arising from a real estate contract dispute. The trial court granted summary judgment on Haven…
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 Compulsory Counterclaim cases and more on FLexlaw
On Motion for Reheating or Clarification
Following the Court’s consideration of the appellee’s motion for rehearing or clarification, the Court denies the motion for rehearing, grants in part the motion for clarification, and issues the opinion which follows in place of the opinion filed October 21, 2009.
The Haven Center, Inc., appeals a final summary judgment disposing of both its counterclaims against Homero Meruelo, the plaintiff below. That judgment did not, however, include an adjudication of Meruelo’s claims against Haven Center for declaratory judgment and specific performance of a real estate contract. Mer-uelo’s claims remain pending, and Haven Center’s counterclaims arose out of the same contract, transactions, and occurrences that were involved in Meruelo’s claims.
The adjudication of compulsory counterclaims such as these is “not appeal-able until a final disposition of the original cause has obtained on the merits.” Campbell v. Gordon, 674 So.2d 783, 785 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Northcutt v. Pathway Financial, 555 So.2d 368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Meruelo nevertheless encouraged the trial court to add the words of finality, that Haven Center “take nothing on its counterclaim and go hence without day,” over Haven Center’s objection. We reverse the judgment to the extent that it includes the phrase “go hence without day” because it is not, in fact, a final judgment, but we do so (a) without disturbing the trial court’s entry of summary judgment on the counterclaim and (b) without prejudice to the right of the parties to appeal when both the claims and the counterclaims have been fully adjudicated.
Clarification granted; Reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Investacorp, Inc. v. Evans, 88 So. 3d 248 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…So. 3d at 665; Williamson v. Banta, 22 So. 3d 152 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); Molina, 824 So. 2d at 964; see also Millennium Group I, L.L.C. v. Attorneys Title Ins. Fund, Inc., 847 So. 2d 1115, 1116-17 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Cf. Haven Ctr., Inc. v. Meruelo, 22 So. 3d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009). Accordingly, we reverse the partial summary judgment before us and remand with directions to the trial court to strike the phrase “for which let execution issue, forthwith.” Absent that language permitting execution, the partial…
-
Transp. Servs. v. Seaboard Marine, 245 So. 3d 1006 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
Authorities Cited
- Northcutt v. Pathway Fin., 555 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Campbell v. Gordon, 674 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)