Pearce v. Parsons, 81-2557
| Citation | 414 So.2d 296 |
| Decision Date | 26 May 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 81-2557,81-2557 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Parties | David PEARCE, Appellant, v. Honorable Broward N. PARSONS, County Judge, and Johnson-Prewitt & Associates, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees. |
Hubert R. Lindsey and F. Kendall Slinkman, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Jack J. Rafter, Jr., Clewiston, for appellees.
Appellant David Pearce seeks a writ of common law certiorari from the circuit court's denial of his petition for a writ of certiorari or prohibition. 1 He challenges the circuit court's failure to grant him relief from a county court order setting aside its prior order transferring a complaint and counterclaim to the circuit court. The county court's order had the effect of reducing the amount of Pearce's counterclaim. We find that the circuit court erred in failing to grant appellant's writ and reverse.
Johnson-Prewitt filed a claim for $2,500 in county court against appellant Pearce. Pearce counterclaimed for an amount in excess of the county court jurisdiction and moved to transfer the action to the circuit court. The county court granted the motion and ordered the cause transferred on October 29, 1979, although Pearce had not deposited the clerk's service charge as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.170(j). On December 12, Johnson-Prewitt moved to set aside the transfer because Pearce had not paid the service charge. On December 20, prior to a hearing on the motion, Pearce deposited the requisite sum with the clerk of the court. Subsequently, on January 10, 1980, the court denied the motion. Then, on January 15 the court, citing a clerical error, entered an order setting aside its order of January 10. On March 7 the court entered a further order setting aside the transfer and reducing Pearce's counterclaim. Pearce timely petitioned the circuit court to grant a writ of common law certiorari or a writ of prohibition to prevent the county court from proceeding with the case. When the circuit court denied Pearce's petition, he sought relief from this court.
Pearce argues that the county court's order should be set aside on two grounds. First, he contends that the county court did not have jurisdiction at the time the order was rendered. Second, he urges that as Johnson-Prewitt suffered no prejudice by the delay in payment of the service charge, the trial court's sanction was too severe.
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.170(j) provides:
If the demand of any counterclaim or cross-claim exceeds the jurisdiction of the court in which the action is pending, the action shall be transferred forthwith to the court of the same county having jurisdiction of the demand in the counterclaim or cross-claim with only such alterations in the pleadings as are essential. The court shall order the transfer of the action and the transmittal of all papers in it to the proper court if the party asserting the demand exceeding the jurisdiction deposits with the court having jurisdiction a sum sufficient to pay the clerk's service charge in the court to which the action is transferred at the time of filing the counterclaim or cross-claim. Thereupon the original papers and deposit shall be transmitted and filed with a certified copy of the order. The court to which the action is transferred shall have full power and jurisdiction over the demands of all parties. Failure to make the service charge deposit at the time the counterclaim or cross-claim is filed, or within such further time as the court...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Conner v. Mid-Florida Growers, Inc.
...review had been sought by filing a notice of appeal. See Johnson v. Citizens State Bank, 537 So.2d 96 (Fla.1989); Pearce v. Parsons, 414 So.2d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Upon receipt of a facially sufficient petition for writ of mandamus, a court having jurisdiction to consider such a petition......
-
Outboard Marine Domestic Intern. Sales Corp. v. Florida Stevedoring Corp., 85-1939
...Inc. v. State, 413 So.2d 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (applying Williams to filing of APA proceeding); see also Pearce v. Parsons, 414 So.2d 296 (Fla.2d DCA 1982) (deposit of fees for removal of cause to circuit court not jurisdictional; citing Williams ). Indeed, because, in contrast to the fil......
-
Johnson v. Citizens State Bank
...have also considered as notices of appeal, erroneously titled petitions for writs of certiorari. See, e.g., Pearce v. Parsons, 414 So.2d 296, 296 n. 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). ...
-
Canal Ins. Co. v. Reed
...form of appellate relief is mischaracterized."); Thomson, Bohrer, Werth & Razook, 561 So.2d 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Pearce v. Parsons, 414 So.2d 296 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).5 We respectfully question the Sunshine court's rationale in one other respect. That court failed to discuss the primary j......