Harvey Gordon, Inc. v. Testa

413 So. 2d 408, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19495
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 16, 1982·No. No. 81-1707·Published

Opinion

ON REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

In an action to enforce a foreign judgment, the trial court may not entertain a counterclaim based on perjured testimony in support of the judgment. See, e.g., Haas v. Haas, 59 So.2d 640 (Fla.1952); Fair v. Tampa Electric Co., 158 Fla. 15, 27 So.2d 514 (1946); City of Miami v. Coconut Grove Marine Properties, Inc., 358 So.2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), cert. denied, 372 So.2d 932 (Fla.1979).

We treat the Petition for writ of prohibition as certiorari and grant same on a finding that the action of the trial court constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of the law.

The order under review is quashed and the cause is remanded with instructions [409] that the court not consider the defenses or counterclaim asserted except the defense which challenges the finality of the judgment sought to be enforced.

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

Harvey Gordon, Inc. v. Testa, 413 So. 2d 408, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 19495 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

413 So. 2d 408 (Harvey Gordon, Inc. v. Testa) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Haas v. Haas
59 So. 2d 640 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1952)
City of Miami v. Coconut Grove Marine Prop., Inc.
358 So. 2d 1151 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)
Fair v. Tampa Electric Company
27 So. 2d 514 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1946)