JOHANNA FADDIS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE CITY OF HOMESTEAD, ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion by striking the plaintiff's pleadings and entering a final judgment for the defendants.
The plaintiff committed intentional acts of perjury and other misconduct constituting a fraud upon the court. This scheme was calculated to interfere …
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 Sanctions For Misconduct cases and more on FLexlaw
Johanna Faddis, the plaintiff below, appeals the trial court’s entry of a final judg*1135ment in favor of the City of Homestead and other defendants below, following an order striking Faddis’s pleadings as a sanction for committing a fraud upon the court. Given the severity of the sanction, we review the trial court’s order under a “somewhat narrowed” abuse of discretion standard. Empire World Towers, LLC v. CDR Créances, S.A.S., 89 So.3d 1034, 1038 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (citing Williams v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Pub. Health Trust, 17 So.3d 859 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)).
The record contains competent substantial evidence to support the trial court’s determination, by clear and convincing evidence, that Faddis’s misconduct, including intentional acts of perjury on a central and material issue, was undertaken with intent to deceive, constituted a deliberate scheme to subvert the judicial process, and amounted to a fraud upon the court. See generally Suarez v. Benihana Nat’l of Fla. Corp., 88 So.3d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012); Bertrand v. Belhomme, 892 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in striking Faddis’s pleadings and entering final judgment in favor of the defendants below, as the record amply demonstrates Faddis “sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.” Empire World Towers, 89 So.3d at 1038 (quoting Cox v. Burke, 706 So.2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) and Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir.1989)).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Florida BAR v. Kelsay Dayon Patterson, 257 So. 3d 56 (Fla. 2018)…rt of Appeal affirmed the circuit court's order, finding Faddis's conduct was "undertaken with intent to deceive, constituted a deliberate scheme to subvert the judicial process, and amounted to a fraud upon the court." Faddis v. City of Homestead , 121 So. 3d 1134, 1135 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). While proceedings were ongoing in the circuit court, Patterson also pursued a civil rights claim against the city and other defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern [*59] Distric…
-
Vilma Martinez v. The Bank OF NEW York Mellon, 198 So. 3d 911 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…z to present her case. The trial court denied the motion for new trial and this appeal followed. ANALYSIS This court reviews the trial court’s sanction- order “under a ‘somewhat narrowed’ abuse of discretion standard.” Faddis v. City of Homestead, 121 So. 3d 1134, 1135 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). It is well-settled in Florida “that a party who has been guilty of fraud or misconduct in the prosecution or defense of a civil proceeding is not permitted to continue to employ the very institution she has subverted to ach…
-
Faddis v. The City OF Homestead, 157 So. 3d 447 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)…determination of amount. . This is the second appearance of this case before the court. We affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the complaint for fraud on the court in a written opinion issued September 4, 2013. See Faddis v. City of Homestead, 121 So. 3d 1134 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). Attorney Patterson has represented Faddis from the day the complaint was filed, and in this and the prior appeal. . Consequently, in the order to show cause, we also dismissed Patterson’s appeal of attorney fees for lack of juri…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- COX v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
- Salim Aoude v. Mobil OIL Corp., 892 F.2d 1115 (1st Cir. 1989)
- Empire World Towers, LLC v. CDR Créances, 89 So. 3d 1034 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
- Jose and Anais Suarez v. Benihana Nat'l OF Fla. Corp., 88 So. 3d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
- Gisleine Bertrand v. Anilus Belhomme, 892 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Williams v. Miami-Dade Cnty. Pub. Health Tr., 17 So. 3d 859 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)