Robert Lane v. Christopher Cunniffe

174 So. 3d 1123, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14075, 2015 WL 5613475
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 24, 2015·No. 4D15-174·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the non-final order denying appellant’s motion for relief from final judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure l-.540(b). In August, 2014, the trial court entered a final judgment. In September, 2014, the court denied a .motion for rehearing. Appellant did not appeal these rulings. Appellant filed his motion for relief from judgment on December 29, 2014. Although the trial court committed procedural errors in its handling of this motion, such errors were harmless; the rule 1.540(b) motion should have been stricken because it attempted to rehash matters raised in the motion for rehearing and failed to raise grounds authorized under rule 1.540(b). None of the evidence identified in the motion was “newly discovered” within the meaning of rule 1.540(b)(2). See Balmoral Condo. Ass’n v. Grimaldi, 107 So.3d 1149 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); Zivitz v. Zivitz, 16 So.3d 841 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); Herskowitz v. Herskowitz, 513 So.2d 1318, 1319 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

CIKLIN, C.J., WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

Robert Lane v. Christopher Cunniffe, 174 So. 3d 1123, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14075, 2015 WL 5613475 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

174 So. 3d 1123 (Robert Lane v. Christopher Cunniffe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zivitz v. Zivitz
16 So. 3d 841 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)
Herskowitz v. Herskowitz
513 So. 2d 1318 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Balmoral Condominium Ass'n v. Grimaldi
107 So. 3d 1149 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)