Drak, L.L.C. v. Salcines Development, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Drak, L.L.C. v. Salcines Development, Inc.

5 So. 3d 713, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1037, 2009 WL 321617

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 11, 2009

Docket3D08-3027

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 5 So. 3d 713 (Drak, L.L.C. v. Salcines Development, Inc.) 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

Drak, L.L.C. v. Salcines Development, Inc., 5 So. 3d 713, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1037, 2009 WL 321617 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We grant the petition for writ of prohibition and remand with instructions that the trial court vacate the November 3, 2008 order granting Porry and Alegre’s motion for rehearing and reconsideration. The trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a motion for rehearing of its October 16, 2008 order denying Porry and Alegre’s motion to set aside default final judgment. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b); Catalano v. Catalano, 516 So.2d 77, 77 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) (stating that motions for rehearing of orders issued under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) are not authorized); Francisco v. Victoria Marine Shipping, 486 So.2d 1386 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (stating that an order entered under Rule 1.540 does not “rise to the level of a judgment” and, therefore, a trial court lacks authority to entertain a motion for rehearing from such order).

Petition granted.

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

PER CURIAM.

We grant the petition for writ of prohibition and remand with instructions that the trial court vacate the November 3, 2008 order granting Porry and Alegre’s motion for rehearing and reconsideration. The trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a motion for rehearing of its October 16, 2008 order denying Porry and Alegre’s motion to set aside default final judgment. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.540(b); Catalano v. Catalano, 516 So.2d 77, 77 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987) (stating that motions for rehearing of orders issued under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) are not authorized); Francisco v. Victoria Marine Shipping, 486 So.2d 1386 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986) (stating that an order entered under Rule 1.540 does not “rise to the level of a judgment” and, therefore, a trial court lacks authority to entertain a motion for rehearing from such order).

Petition granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 So. 3d 713, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1037, 2009 WL 321617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/drak-llc-v-salcines-development-inc-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack