Bolton v. Bolton, 2D00-768.
| Decision Date | 23 May 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D00-768.,2D00-768. |
| Citation | 787 So.2d 237 |
| Parties | Diane I. BOLTON, Appellant, v. Michael BOLTON, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Cynthia L. Greene of Law Offices of Cynthia L. Greene, P.A., Miami, and Law Offices of Allyson Hughes, P.A., New Port Richey, co-counsel for Appellant.
No brief filed by Appellee.
Diane Bolton ("Wife") appeals the final judgment dissolving her marriage to Michael Bolton ("Husband"). Due to the procedural error that occurred when the trial court signed two conflicting final judgments, we reverse and remand for a new trial.
The parties were married in 1974 and separated in 1997. There were no children born of the marriage and the parties resolved issues of equitable distribution through mediation. The only contested issue at the final hearing was the Husband's request for alimony.
No transcript of the final hearing held on September 28, 1999, has been submitted to this court. The record reflects that after the final hearing the Husband's counsel submitted a proposed final judgment of dissolution, which ordered the Wife to pay the Husband the sum of $400 per month in permanent periodic alimony. The trial court signed and entered the Husband's proposed judgment on December 20, 1999. The Wife filed a timely motion for rehearing along with her own proposed final judgment, which denied the Husband's request for alimony. The trial court signed the Wife's proposed judgment on January 3, 2000, and it was filed on January 5, 2000. On January 25, 2000, the trial court entered an order clarifying the conflicting final judgments. The court vacated the January 3, 2000, final judgment, stating that it was entered in error, and affirmed the December 20, 1999, judgment.
On appeal, the Wife challenges the trial court's order of January 25, 2000, arguing that: (1) the trial court erred in directing the parties to prepare final judgments in the absence of a ruling from the court on the evidence; (2) the record demonstrates that the trial judge did not recall the case when he signed the judgments months after the final hearing; and (3) the trial judge lacked jurisdiction to enter the January 25th order because he lost jurisdiction ten days after entry of the final judgment.
We reject the Wife's first two arguments because she did not bring forth an adequate record to support her first argument, and, as to the second argument, the delay between the final hearing and the entry of the judgments was not so significant as to give rise to a presumption that the trial court did not remember the case. We agree, however, that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to correct its error on January 25, 2000.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Levy v. Levy, No. 2D03-2903
...trial court was authorized to enter the amendment as the correction of a clerical error pursuant to rule 1.540(a). In Bolton v. Bolton, 787 So.2d 237 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), this court had occasion to address a similar argument. In that case, we said: A trial court may correct a clerical error ......
-
Moforis v. Moforis, 4D06-4556.
...848 So.2d 1180, 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (quoting Keller v. Belcher, 256 So.2d 561, 563 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)). In Bolton v. Bolton, 787 So.2d 237, 238-39 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), the Second District Court of Appeal wrote that "[a] trial court may correct a clerical error`at any time on its own init......
-
Padot v. Padot, No. 2D03-1011
...any time on its own initiative or on the motion of any party and after such notice, if any, as the court orders." In Bolton v. Bolton, 787 So.2d 237, 238 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), this court stated as A trial court may correct a clerical error "at any time on its own initiative" pursuant to Flori......
-
Dep't of Revenue ex rel. Williams v. Annis, 2D14–301.
...of Civil Procedure 1.530, or by appellate review.’ ”4 Levy v. Levy, 900 So.2d 737, 746 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (quoting Bolton v. Bolton, 787 So.2d 237, 238–39 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) ). “[T]he question of whether the original trial judge erred in setting the amount of child support or misapplied the......
-
Final judgment; rehearing; motions related to judgment
...of document later is insufficient to serve as an event or occurrence upon which husband may supplement his pleadings.); Bolton v. Bolton, 787 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)(judicial errors, which include errors that affect substance of judgment, can be corrected on motion pursuant to rule 1.......