Parsons v. Whitaker Plumbing of Boca Raton

730 So. 2d 839, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4707, 1999 WL 212822
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 14, 1999·No. No. 99-0718·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of prohibition is denied. We write however to reiterate the general rule that once an appeal has been filed to review a final order/judgment, the lower court is divested of jurisdiction to enter an order affecting the subject matter of the appeal. Thompson v. Stewart, 569 So.2d 1372 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). We recognize that in some cases an amendment to the final judgment or a subsequent fee judgment will not disturb the subject matter of the appeal. If questionable and upon request this court can relinquish jurisdiction to the trial court to permit it to amend a judgment, if appropriate. See, e.g., Maynard v. Maynard, 515 So.2d 308 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

The above does not alter the well settled principle that absent a stay or bond, the filing of a notice of appeal does not divest the trial court of jurisdiction to enforce a final order. FMS Management Sys. Inc. v. IDS Mortgage Corp., 402 So.2d 474 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

DELL, POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

Parsons v. Whitaker Plumbing of Boca Raton, 730 So. 2d 839, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 4707, 1999 WL 212822 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

730 So. 2d 839 (Parsons v. Whitaker Plumbing of Boca Raton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dow Jones & Company, Inc. v. Robert P. Kaye
256 F.3d 1251 (Eleventh Circuit, 2001)