Ponsoldt v. Cadle Co.
This text of 829 So. 2d 937 (Ponsoldt v. Cadle Co.) 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.
Opinion
William and Mariane Ponsoldt seek review of an order that denied their motion to vacate a final judgment.
[938]*938In 1991, a bank sued Pegasus Ranch, Inc. and the Ponsoldts to foreclose a mortgage. The Ranch filed a motion to dismiss without raising an objection to personal jurisdiction. Later the Ranch and the Ponsoldts moved for a protective order. In that motion, the Ponsoldts appeared “without waiving rights exercised in their Motion to Dismiss.” The trial court concluded that the Ponsoldts “adopted a motion to dismiss filed by the Corporate Defendant without reserving the right to raise an issue of in personam jurisdiction.” We find no error in the trial court’s conclusion that the Ponsoldts adopted the motion to dismiss, which constituted a waiver of the lack of personal jurisdiction. See Fiocchi v. Trainello, 566 So.2d 904, 904 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Zimmerman v. Weinberg, 557 So.2d 193, 194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
829 So. 2d 937, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14595, 2002 WL 31255563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ponsoldt-v-cadle-co-fladistctapp-2002.