Yarine v. Blanco

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Yarine v. Blanco

859 So. 2d 1275, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18091, 2003 WL 22799771

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 26, 2003

DocketNo. 3D03-461

StatusPublished

This text of 859 So. 2d 1275 (Yarine v. Blanco) 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

Yarine v. Blanco, 859 So. 2d 1275, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18091, 2003 WL 22799771 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse that portion of the trial court’s omnibus order dated February 3, 2003, as it relates to Magaly Blanco (vacating the dismissal of Magaly Blanco’s claims and reinstating them). The trial court is instructed to reinstate that portion of the trial court’s order dated March 27, 2002, dismissing Magaly Blanco’s claims. See Department of Revenue v. Riley, 684 So.2d 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)(a successor judge may not correct errors of law committed by his predecessor and hence he cannot review and reverse on the merits and on the same facts the final orders and decrees of his predecessor); City of Miami Beach v. Chadderton, 306 So.2d 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)(generally a successor judge cannot review, modify, or reverse upon the merits and on the same facts final orders of a predecessor unless there exists some special circumstance such as mistake or fraud perpetrated upon the court).

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse that portion of the trial court’s omnibus order dated February 3, 2003, as it relates to Magaly Blanco (vacating the dismissal of Magaly Blanco’s claims and reinstating them). The trial court is instructed to reinstate that portion of the trial court’s order dated March 27, 2002, dismissing Magaly Blanco’s claims. See Department of Revenue v. Riley, 684 So.2d 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)(a successor judge may not correct errors of law committed by his predecessor and hence he cannot review and reverse on the merits and on the same facts the final orders and decrees of his predecessor); City of Miami Beach v. Chadderton, 306 So.2d 558 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)(generally a successor judge cannot review, modify, or reverse upon the merits and on the same facts final orders of a predecessor unless there exists some special circumstance such as mistake or fraud perpetrated upon the court).

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

859 So. 2d 1275, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18091, 2003 WL 22799771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yarine-v-blanco-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack