KRISIA DEL PRADO
v.
OPTIMUS U.S. 801 NW 47TH AVE, LLC, ETC.
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.
A motion under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) requires the moving party to allege new circumstances arising after the judgment that affect the trial court's decision, and such relief is extraordinary and narrowly construed.
[1] A motion under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) requires the moving party to allege new circumstances arising after entry of final judgment that affect the trial…
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 intelligence“Rule 1.540(b)(5) was designed to provide 'extraordinary relief' in exceptional circumstances, and is to be narrowly construed”
From Pure H2O Biotechnologies, Inc. v. Mazziotti, explaining the limited scope of Rule 1.540(b) motions
Krisia Del Prado and others appealed a non-final order from the Miami-Dade Circuit Court in a case against Optimus U.S. 801 NW 47th Ave, LLC. The appe…
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 Post-Judgment Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed March 20, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-1168 Lower Tribunal No. 19-33861
________________
Krisia Del Prado, et al.,
Appellants,
vs.
Optimus U.S. 801 NW 47th Ave, LLC, etc., et al.,
Appellees.
An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lisa S. Walsh, Judge. Law Office of Michael Garcia Petit, P.A., and Michael Garcia Petit (Miramar), for appellants. Dimond Kaplan & Rothstein, P.A., and Scott M. Dimond and Lorenz Michel Prüss, for appellees. Before LINDSEY, LOBREE and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Garcia v. Christiana Tr., 230 So. 3d 66, 69 (Fla. 3d DCA
2017) (requiring “the moving party to ‘allege new [post-judgment] circumstances affecting the decision made by the trial judge’”) (quoting
Gotham Ins. Co. v. Matthew, 179 So. 3d 437, 442 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015));
United States v. Watts, 786 F. 3d 152, 160 (2d Cir. 2015) (“As a general matter, the section clarifies that ‘[a]ll right, title, and interest in property . . .
[subject to criminal forfeiture] vests in the United States upon the commission of the act giving rise to forfeiture.’”) (alteration in original) (quoting 21 U.S.C.
§ 853(c)); Baker v. Baker, 920 So. 2d 689, 692 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (“[T]his court has held that the equities mentioned in [Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b)(5)] are limited to ones that come to fruition after the final judgment.”); Pure H2O
Biotechnologies, Inc. v. Mazziotti, 937 So. 2d 242, 245 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (explaining that “Rule 1.540(b)(5) was designed to provide ‘extraordinary relief’ in exceptional circumstances, and is to be narrowly construed”) (citations omitted); Toledano v. Garcia, 338 So. 3d 1009, 1012 (Fla. 3d DCA
2022) (noting abuse of discretion standard in reviewing an order denying a
Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b) motion); see also § 605.0108(1), Fla. Stat. (“A limited liability company is an entity distinct from its members.”); Corp. Express Off.
Prods., Inc. v. Phillips, 847 So. 2d 406, 411 (Fla. 2003) (“A foundation of corporate law is that . . . the existence of a corporate entity is not affected by changes in its ownership or changes in management.”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Krisia Del Prado v. Optimus U.S. 801 NW 47th Ave, LLC, 338 So. 3d 1009 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)…es, Inc. v. Mazziotti, 937 So. 2d 242, 245 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (explaining that “Rule 1.540(b)(5) was designed to provide ‘extraordinary relief’ in exceptional circumstances, and is to be narrowly construed”) (citations omitted); Toledano v. Garcia, 338 So. 3d 1009, 1012 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (noting abuse of discretion standard in reviewing an order denying a Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b) motion); see also § 605.0108(1), Fla. Stat. (“A limited liability company is an entity distinct from its members.”); Corp. Expre…
Authorities Cited
- Corporate Express Off. Prods., Inc. v. Phillips, 847 So. 2d 406 (Fla. 2003)
- Pure H20 Biotechnologies, Inc. v. Mazziotti, 937 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Gotham Ins. Co. v. Matthew, 179 So. 3d 437 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)
- Baker v. Baker, 920 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- Garcia v. Christiana Tr., 230 So. 3d 66 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)
- Krisia Del Prado v. Optimus U.S. 801 NW 47th Ave, LLC, 338 So. 3d 1009 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)