Philippe v. Michael Weiner, M.D., P.A. Profit Sharing Plan

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Philippe v. Michael Weiner, M.D., P.A. Profit Sharing Plan

207 So. 3d 308, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17092

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 16, 2016

Docket15-2105 & 15-1984 & 15-1967

StatusPublished

This text of 207 So. 3d 308 (Philippe v. Michael Weiner, M.D., P.A. Profit Sharing Plan) 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

Philippe v. Michael Weiner, M.D., P.A. Profit Sharing Plan, 207 So. 3d 308, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17092 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

SALTER, J.

These three consolidated appeals involve post-final-judgment actions by the appellants as judgment debtors. The appeals constitute a collateral attack on a final deficiency judgment entered in 2012 and affirmed by this Court in July 2014. Philippe v. Weiner, 143 So.3d 1086 (Fla. 3d *309 DCA 2014). Our prior opinion, though requiring recomputation of the total amount due (based on the effective date of liquidation of the deficiency, exclusion of certain real estate taxes and insurance costs, and an adjustment to the prejudgment interest due), became law of the case as to the issues now sought to be raised by the appellants. Fla. Dept. of Tramp. v. Juliano, 801 So.2d 101, 105-06 (Fla.2001).

The appellants did not directly appeal the post-remand, recomputed final judgment itself, which was entered nunc pro tunc to the date of the original deficiency judgment. Further, the appellants did not offer evidence that the amended final judgment should reflect a credit for the market value of stock obtained by the appellee through execution and a sheriff’s sale, and they did not seek or obtain a stay to pursue a review of either the original or amended judgment. No error having been shown, the orders below are affirmed in each of the three consolidated cases.

Affirmed.

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

SALTER, J.

These three consolidated appeals involve post-final-judgment actions by the appellants as judgment debtors. The appeals constitute a collateral attack on a final deficiency judgment entered in 2012 and affirmed by this Court in July 2014. Philippe v. Weiner, 143 So.3d 1086 (Fla. 3d *309 DCA 2014). Our prior opinion, though requiring recomputation of the total amount due (based on the effective date of liquidation of the deficiency, exclusion of certain real estate taxes and insurance costs, and an adjustment to the prejudgment interest due), became law of the case as to the issues now sought to be raised by the appellants. Fla. Dept. of Tramp. v. Juliano, 801 So.2d 101, 105-06 (Fla.2001).

The appellants did not directly appeal the post-remand, recomputed final judgment itself, which was entered nunc pro tunc to the date of the original deficiency judgment. Further, the appellants did not offer evidence that the amended final judgment should reflect a credit for the market value of stock obtained by the appellee through execution and a sheriff’s sale, and they did not seek or obtain a stay to pursue a review of either the original or amended judgment. No error having been shown, the orders below are affirmed in each of the three consolidated cases.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 So. 3d 308, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17092, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/philippe-v-michael-weiner-md-pa-profit-sharing-plan-fladistctapp-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack