Keitt v. STEIN MART, INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Keitt v. STEIN MART, INC.

78 So. 3d 104, 2012 WL 245563, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1047

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 27, 2012·No. 5D11-12·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s “Motion to Vacate the Final Judgment and Request for a New Hearing.” However, our review of the record reflects a scrivener’s error in the final judgment. The sum total of the judgment should be $142,500 plus costs and fees of $1,243.71 for a total of $143,743.71. The $47,500 awarded to Appellee in Count I of its complaint is a component of the award in Count II. To include it again would improperly count it twice. On remand, the final judgment shall be corrected.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED FOR CORRECTION OF JUDGMENT.

ORFINGER, C.J., SAWAYA and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s “Motion to Vacate the Final Judgment and Request for a New Hearing.” However, our review of the record reflects a scrivener’s error in the final judgment. The sum total of the judgment should be $142,500 plus costs and fees of $1,243.71 for a total of $143,743.71. The $47,500 awarded to Appellee in Count I of its complaint is a component of the award in Count II. To include it again would improperly count it twice. On remand, the final judgment shall be corrected.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED FOR CORRECTION OF JUDGMENT.

ORFINGER, C.J., SAWAYA and EVANDER, JJ., concur.

Keitt v. STEIN MART, INC., 78 So. 3d 104, 2012 WL 245563, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1047 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

78 So. 3d 104 (Keitt v. STEIN MART, INC.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related