HALDEANE SMITH AND JENNIFER SMITH, APPELLANTS,
v.
BRINKS, INC., 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.
The appellate court reversed the trial court's dismissal of a complaint based on alleged fraud upon the court, finding that the trial court failed to provide the required express written findings of fact. The appellee conceded the error, and the court remanded for the trial court to make proper factual findings while reconsidering its ruling.
The court held that an order dismissing a case for fraud upon the court must include express written findings of fact demonstrating that the court carefully balanced the equities and that the moving party proved fraud clearly and convincingly. The trial court's failure to include such findings was reversible error.
[1] An order granting a dismissal or default for fraud on the court must include express written findings demonstrating that the trial court has carefully balanced the equiti…
[2] Without express factual findings in the dismissal order, the appellate record is insufficient to determine whether the trial court considered the proper factors and balan…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“an order granting a dismissal or default for fraud on the court must include express written findings demonstrating that the trial court has carefully balanced the equities and supporting the conclusion that the moving party has proven, clearly and convincingly, that the non-moving party implemented a deliberate scheme calculated to subvert the judicial process.”
Establishes the mandatory requirement for factual findings in fraud-upon-the-court dismissal orders
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court initially denied Brinks, Inc.'s motion to dismiss but upon reconsideration granted the motion and dismissed Appellants' complaint with…
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 Fraud On The Court cases and more on FLexlaw
*1177 ON CONFESSION OF ERROR
Appellants Haldeane Smith and Jennifer Smith appeal the trial court’s order granting Appellee Brinks, Inc.’s motion to dismiss Appellants’ complaint. The trial court concluded that Appellants had committed a fraud upon the court. After first denying Appellee’s motion, the trial court, upon reconsideration, granted the motion and dismissed the complaint with prejudice. However, the trial court did not list any factual findings with respect to the purported fraud in the dismissal order.
Appellants first argue on appeal that the legal requirements for fraud upon the court have not been met, including the requirement that the trial court must provide actual findings of fact demonstrating fraud in an order granting dismissal. To this point, Appellee has filed a confession of error and concedes that the trial court erred in failing to provide the requisite factual findings in its dismissal order. We agree and find this dispositive of the appeal. See Chacha v. Transp. USA, Inc., 78 So.3d 727, 731 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (“[A]n order granting a dismissal or default for fraud on the court must include express written findings demonstrating that the trial court has carefully balanced the equities and supporting the conclusion that the moving party has proven, clearly and convincingly, that the non-moving party implemented a deliberate scheme calculated to subvert the judicial process.”) (emphasis supplied). Without any factual findings in the order, the record on appeal is insufficient for the reviewing court to determine whether the trial court considered the proper factors and carefully balanced the competing policies. Id.; Arzuman v. Saud, 843 So.2d 950, 952 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).
Therefore, we reverse the final order granting dismissal and remand for the trial court to make express written findings while being free to reconsider the ultimate ruling.
Reversed and Remanded.
TAYLOR, MAY and FORST, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stein v. Burton Defren, 247 So. 3d 24 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
-
Stein v. Charles, 264 So. 3d 994 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Arzuman v. Shamsah Saud and Lawrence Bunin, 843 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Chacha v. Transp. USA, Inc., 78 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)