Batteiger v. Batteiger, No. 58-416
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Writing for the Court | PEARSON; CARROLL, CHAS., C. J., and HORTON |
| Citation | 109 So.2d 602 |
| Parties | Ellen Gale BATTEIGER, Appellant, v. Kenneth George BATTEIGER, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 58-416 |
| Decision Date | 10 March 1959 |
Page 602
v.
Kenneth George BATTEIGER, Appellee.
Page 603
A. N. Spence, Miami, for appellant.
Rohan & Costello and George H. Pickar, Miami, for appellee.
PEARSON, Judge.
The only question presented by the appellant is whether the lower court had jurisdiction to enter an amended final decree. It is a well recognized principle that the trial court loses jurisdiction of the case at the expiration of the time for filing a petition for rehearing or motion for new trial unless such petition or motion is filed. Bartlett & Sons Co. v. Pan-American Studios, 144 Fla. 531, 198 So. 195; Jappe v. Heller, Fla.1953, 65 So.2d 302; Cf. Ray v. Ray, Fla.App.1958, 99 So.2d 721. This rule is subject to the exception that the trial court may correct clerical mistakes or mistakes arising from oversight or omissions at any time. Rule 1.38, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 30 F.S.A.
In the case appealed, a final decree of divorce was signed by the chancellor on April 10, 1958, and filed for record on April 16, 1958. The decree ordered that the parties be divorced from each other and that the appellee, defendant below, execute a deed conveying certain property, which the court found was purchased with plaintiff's
Two letters were filed simultaneously with the final decree.
One was written by the plaintiff's attorney, addressed to the chancellor, and dated April 8, 1958. The letter stated that because of the case of Howell v. Howell, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 170, 'the court should grant the divorce specifically to one or the other party.' The writer contended that this case also stood for the proposition that the wife should be awarded the home.
The other letter was written by defendant's attorney, addressed to the chancellor, and dated April 11, 1958. This letter stated that the position taken by plaintiff's attorney in his letter was inconsistent with his position at trial, and suggested that in view of the Howell case the entire matter should be reconsidered at an informal conference. In the instant case, the original final decree failed to award the divorce specifically to one of the parties, which specific award is necessary under the decisions. Sahler v. Sahler, 154 Fla. 206, 17 So.2d 105; MacFadden v. MacFadden, 157 Fla. 477, 26 So.2d 502; Friedman v. Friedman, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 167; Howell v. Howell, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 170.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
General Capital Corp. v. Tel Service Co., Nos. 4990
...trial has expired or same has been denied. Davidson v. Stringer, 1933, 109 Fla. 238, 147 So. 228; Batteiger v. Batteiger, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 602; State ex rel. Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. Kehoe, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 459, and Mid-State Homes, Inc. v. Ritchie, Fla.App.1966, 181 So.2d ......
-
Bell v. Bell, Nos. 58-380
...Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175; Burnup v. Bagley, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 622; Batteiger v. Batteiger, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 602. We turn now to a consideration of the assignments of error directed to the post decretal order by the wife as appellant. Subsequent to the am......
-
Behm v. Division of Administration, State Dept. of Transp., No. 72--77
...Inc. v. Garcia, Fla.App.1969, 221 So.2d 786; Kippy v. Colburn, Fla.1965, 177 So.2d 193; Batteiger v. Batteiger, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 602; Cortina v. Cortina, Fla.1957, 98 So.2d 334; Ganzer v. Ganzer, Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 591. It appears from the cases the terms 'filed' and 'served' are fre......
-
Floyd v. State ex rel. LaVigne Elec. Co., No. 31376
...this pronouncement the court cited the opinion of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, in Batteiger v. Batteiger, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 602, in which it was held that except for the correction of clerical errors or mistakes due to oversight or omissions, a chancellor may not ente......
-
General Capital Corp. v. Tel Service Co., Nos. 4990
...trial has expired or same has been denied. Davidson v. Stringer, 1933, 109 Fla. 238, 147 So. 228; Batteiger v. Batteiger, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 602; State ex rel. Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. Kehoe, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 459, and Mid-State Homes, Inc. v. Ritchie, Fla.App.1966, 181 So.2d ......
-
Bell v. Bell, Nos. 58-380
...Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175; Burnup v. Bagley, Fla.1958, 100 So.2d 622; Batteiger v. Batteiger, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 602. We turn now to a consideration of the assignments of error directed to the post decretal order by the wife as appellant. Subsequent to the am......
-
Floyd v. State ex rel. LaVigne Elec. Co., No. 31376
...this pronouncement the court cited the opinion of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, in Batteiger v. Batteiger, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 602, in which it was held that except for the correction of clerical errors or mistakes due to oversight or omissions, a chancellor may not ente......
-
Behm v. Division of Administration, State Dept. of Transp., No. 72--77
...Inc. v. Garcia, Fla.App.1969, 221 So.2d 786; Kippy v. Colburn, Fla.1965, 177 So.2d 193; Batteiger v. Batteiger, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 602; Cortina v. Cortina, Fla.1957, 98 So.2d 334; Ganzer v. Ganzer, Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 591. It appears from the cases the terms 'filed' and 'served' are fre......