Champion v. Champion

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Champion v. Champion

525 So. 2d 999, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1273, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2171, 1988 WL 51628

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 26, 1988

DocketNo. 87-1491

StatusPublished

This text of 525 So. 2d 999 (Champion v. Champion) 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.

Bluebook

Champion v. Champion, 525 So. 2d 999, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1273, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2171, 1988 WL 51628 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

SHARP, Chief Judge.

Corinne Champion, the former wife, appeals from the dismissal of her motion to set aside the final judgment of dissolution against her former husband, George Champion, pursuant to rule 1.540(b) because of extrinsic fraud. The final judgment was rendered in 1981 and Corinne’s motion for relief was filed in 1986. We affirm.

Rule 1.540(b) limits to one year the time in which a party adversely affected by a judgment may bring a motion seeking relief based on extrinsic or intrinsic fraud. However, the rule states there is no time limit within which a party may bring an independent action for relief of “fraud on the court.” (Rule 1.540(b)). This has been interpreted to permit both motions based on intrinsic or extrinsic fraud within one year under rule 1.540(b), and independent suits after more than one year when based on extrinsic fraud. See DeClaire v. Yohanan, 453 So.2d 375, 380 (Fla.1984); Streater v. Stamper, 466 So.2d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Here the motion pursuant to rule 1.540(b) was not timely filed.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER and DANIEL, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SHARP, Chief Judge.

Corinne Champion, the former wife, appeals from the dismissal of her motion to set aside the final judgment of dissolution against her former husband, George Champion, pursuant to rule 1.540(b) because of extrinsic fraud. The final judgment was rendered in 1981 and Corinne’s motion for relief was filed in 1986. We affirm.

Rule 1.540(b) limits to one year the time in which a party adversely affected by a judgment may bring a motion seeking relief based on extrinsic or intrinsic fraud. However, the rule states there is no time limit within which a party may bring an independent action for relief of “fraud on the court.” (Rule 1.540(b)). This has been interpreted to permit both motions based on intrinsic or extrinsic fraud within one year under rule 1.540(b), and independent suits after more than one year when based on extrinsic fraud. See DeClaire v. Yohanan, 453 So.2d 375, 380 (Fla.1984); Streater v. Stamper, 466 So.2d 397 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Here the motion pursuant to rule 1.540(b) was not timely filed.

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER and DANIEL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

525 So. 2d 999, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1273, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 2171, 1988 WL 51628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/champion-v-champion-fladistctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack