Boyd v. International Fidelity Insurance
This text of 412 So. 2d 944 (Boyd v. International Fidelity Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
Appellants challenge a Final Judgment of Foreclosure entered against property they pledged as security for their son’s appearance on criminal charges. They contend that the entry of summary judgment was error because the bonding company failed to file the full statement required by section 903.14, Florida Statutes (1979),1 setting forth the amount of its bond and the source [945]*945of the security. Counsel for appellants admits that his predecessor failed to present the issue either by affirmative defense or during the hearing which preceded the entry of summary judgment. He contends, nevertheless, that the trial court should have reopened the case after summary judgment had been entered because appellants’ new counsel wished to raise the lack of compliance with section 903.14 as “additional evidence.” We disagree.
A party may not defeat an entered summary judgment by altering previously filed pleadings, see generally Inman v. Club on Sailboat Bay, Inc., 342 So.2d 1069 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), especially when the matters it seeks to present by amendment were available prior to the entry of summary judgment. Appellants’ failure to support their motion for rehearing by furnishing the court with the statement alleged to be violative of section 903.14 and to assert their affirmative defense prior to the entry of summary judgment precludes them from raising the issue on appeal. Incomplete compliance with section 903.14 does not defeat the court’s jurisdiction; the defense of failure to comply with the statutory condition must be asserted or the condition is waived. See Dober v. Worrell, 401 So.2d 1322 (Fla.1981); Sotille v. Gaines Construction Co., 281 So.2d 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973), cert. denied, 289 So.2d 737 (Fla.1974); Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.140(b).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
412 So. 2d 944, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19850, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boyd-v-international-fidelity-insurance-fladistctapp-1982.