J. Alexander Securities, Inc. v. Feldman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

J. Alexander Securities, Inc. v. Feldman

900 So. 2d 758, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6511, 2005 WL 1026740

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 4, 2005

DocketNo. 3D03-2873

StatusPublished

This text of 900 So. 2d 758 (J. Alexander Securities, Inc. v. Feldman) 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

J. Alexander Securities, Inc. v. Feldman, 900 So. 2d 758, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6511, 2005 WL 1026740 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

WELLS, Judge.

J. Alexander Securities, Inc., and its attorney, Richard Friedman, appeal a final order imposing monetary sanctions against them pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2002) for erroneously submitting an agreed order to the lower court, and refusing to take appropriate corrective action when the error was called to their [759]*759attention. In moving for sanctions, appel-lee relied on section 57.105. Because the provisions of section 57.105 do not provide for the imposition of sanctions on the facts of this case, we are constrained to reverse the sanction order as to both J. Alexander Securities and Richard Friedman, but do so without prejudice for the lower court to consider sanctions on any other appropriate grounds. See Moakley v. Smallwood, 826 So.2d 221 (Fla.2002); see also Shop in the Grove, Ltd. v. Union Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Miami, 425 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)(finding that an appeal initiated by a debtor in bankruptcy is not automatically stayed under federal bankruptcy law).

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

WELLS, Judge.

J. Alexander Securities, Inc., and its attorney, Richard Friedman, appeal a final order imposing monetary sanctions against them pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2002) for erroneously submitting an agreed order to the lower court, and refusing to take appropriate corrective action when the error was called to their [759]*759attention. In moving for sanctions, appel-lee relied on section 57.105. Because the provisions of section 57.105 do not provide for the imposition of sanctions on the facts of this case, we are constrained to reverse the sanction order as to both J. Alexander Securities and Richard Friedman, but do so without prejudice for the lower court to consider sanctions on any other appropriate grounds. See Moakley v. Smallwood, 826 So.2d 221 (Fla.2002); see also Shop in the Grove, Ltd. v. Union Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n of Miami, 425 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)(finding that an appeal initiated by a debtor in bankruptcy is not automatically stayed under federal bankruptcy law).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

900 So. 2d 758, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6511, 2005 WL 1026740, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-alexander-securities-inc-v-feldman-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack