ALICE BENNETT, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE, CHARLES BENNETT, CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
BJ'S WHOLESALE CLUB, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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 court vacated the trial court's November 9, 2011 order because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to reconsider a mediated settlement judgment after an initial motion for reconsideration had already been denied, thereby confirming the validity of the underlying final judgment.
A trial court lacks jurisdiction to consider successive motions for rehearing or reconsideration after an initial application for reconsideration has been denied.
[1] A trial court is divested of jurisdiction to consider successive motions for reconsideration or rehearing after an initial application for reconsideration has been denied…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Bennetts sought to vacate a November 2, 2010 final judgment enforcing a mediated settlement of their personal injury action against BJ's Wholesale…
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 Judicial Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
The November 9, 2011, order before us by both appeal and cross-appeal, granted in part and denied in part the Bennetts’ motion to vacate the November 2, 2010, final judgment enforcing a mediated settlement of their personal injury action against the appellee. Because, however, an initial application for reconsideration (styled by the then-pro se Mrs. Bennett as “Disagree with Mediation Agreement and Motion to Enforce Settlement That was Done on November 2, 2010”) had already been denied on March 30, 2011, and it is clear that the trial court thereafter lacked jurisdiction to consider the successive motion for rehearing or indeed any further proceeding related to the merits of the underlying judgment,1 see Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. of Shelby, Ohio v. Pearson, 236 So.2d 1 (Fla.1970); Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. of Am. v. Culbreath Isles Prop. Owners Ass’n, 103 So.3d 900 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012); Wilson v. Ford, 949 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Capital Bank v. Knuck, 537 So.2d 697 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), the order is vacated and held for naught. The effect of this ruling is to confirm the validity of the final judgment, which itself has never been appealed.
Order vacated.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shelby Mut. Ins. Co. OF Shelby v. Tillman Pearson, 236 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1970)
- Cap. Bank v. The Honorable Francis X. Knuck, 537 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Morley, 570 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)
- Krueger v. Ponton, 6 So. 3d 1258 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)
- Everhome Mortg. Co. v. Janssen, 100 So. 3d 1239 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)
- Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. of Am. v. Orline M. Sidman, 103 So. 3d 900 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)
- Garland Wilson v. Ford, 949 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)