Perkins v. Salem

Decision Date18 May 1971
Docket NumberNo. Q--112,Q--112
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals
PartiesA. P. PERKINS, Appellant, v. Zack A. SALEM, Appellee.

Ernest D. Jackson, Sr., Jacksonville, for appellant.

Norton & Wood, Jacksonville, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, who was defendant in the trial court, seeks review of an adverse final judgment rendered against him and two separate post-judgment orders denying him relief against the final judgment of which he complains.

Appellee sued appellant in an assumpsit action on an account stated for merchandise sold to appellant during the years 1968 and 1969. Appellant failed to appear or defend the action, and final judgment was rendered against him in the amount sued for on February 12, 1970. No appeal from the final judgment was taken.

On June 10, 1970, appellant filed in the trial court his motion pursuant to Rule 1.540, Rules of Civil Procedure, 31 F.S.A., seeking relief from the final judgment rendered against him, assigning as grounds (1) that the court lacked jurisdiction over the person of defendant; and (2) that he had a good and legal defense to the cause of action sued upon. After taking testimony and hearing argument of counsel, the trial court rendered its order on July 23, 1970, denying appellant's motion. No appeal from this order of denial was taken, and it therefore became final as to all issues raised by the motion and all issues which might properly have been included therein as grounds for the relief prayed.

On August 19, 1970, appellant filed his second and successive motion for relief from the judgment of February 12, 1970. The grounds of this motion are that (1) the court lacked jurisdiction over the person of the defendant; (2) the judgment is void because appellant was not given notice of the final hearing held for the purpose of determining the damages suffered by appellee as alleged in his complaint; (3) no evidence was adduced before the court to prove the debt alleged in the complaint; and (4) appellant has a legal defense to the cause of action sued upon. After final hearing the trial court rendered its order finding that the last motion filed by appellant on August 19, 1970, contained no grounds which had not theretofore been alleged, or could have been alleged, as grounds for the relief prayed for in the first motion of June 10, 1970, all of which grounds had theretofore been disposed of by the court in denying the earlier ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • Crocker Investments, Inc. v. Statesman Life Ins. Co., 87-294
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 10, 1987
    ...Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540, which attempts to relitigate matters settled by a prior order denying relief. Perkins v. Salem, 249 So.2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971); Atlas v. City of Pembroke Pines, 441 So.2d 652 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Purcell v. Deli Man, Inc., 411 So.2d 378 (Fla. 4th DC......
  • Bank of America, N.A. v. Lane
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 30, 2011
    ...denied and never appealed. Clearly, the second motion in Purcell was barred under principles of res judicata. See also Perkins v. Salem, 249 So.2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). The procedural posture of this case is quite different from Purcell since it involves remanding the case to the trial c......
  • Wengerd v. Rinehart
    • United States
    • Wisconsin Court of Appeals
    • August 26, 1983
    ...636 P.2d 69, 72-73 (Alaska 1981); Royal Coachman Color Guard v. Marine Trading, 398 A.2d 382, 383-84 (Me.1979); Perkins v. Salem, 249 So.2d 466, 467 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1971) reh'g denied. See also, 7 Moore's Federal Practice § 60.28 at 413 (2d ed. 1982). Cf., Lynch v. Betts, 198 Cal.App.2d 75......
  • Adams v. Estate of Henderson
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 21, 2015
    ...Pines, 441 So.2d 652, 652 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), and one citation of authority in Atlas for the quoted language is Perkins v. Salem, 249 So.2d 466, 467 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971), where the court wrote “[t]he [trial] court's denial of the initial motion for relief [from judgment] was therefore res j......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT