Samoilova v. Loginov

• Decision Date: 15 December 2021
• Docket Number: No. 3D21-1144,3D21-1144
• Citation: 330 So.3d 1041
• Parties: Ekaterina Vadimovna SAMOILOVA, etc., Appellant, v. Pyotr Vitalievich LOGINOV, etc., Appellee.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

330 So.3d 1041

Ekaterina Vadimovna SAMOILOVA, etc., Appellant,

v.Pyotr Vitalievich LOGINOV, etc., Appellee.

No. 3D21-1144

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 15, 2021

Law Offices of Andre G. Raikhelson, and Andre G. Raikhelson (Boca Raton), for appellant.

The Law Offices of Bruce Prober, P.A., and Bruce Prober (Fort Lauderdale), for appellee.

Before LOGUE, HENDON, and LOBREE, JJ.

HENDON, J.

Defendant below, Ekaterina Vadimovna Samoilova ("Ms. Samoilova"), appeals from an order denying her motion to vacate or modify the final summary judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff below, Pyotr Loginov ("Mr. Loginov"), and against defendant Igor Viktorovich Samoilov ("Mr. Samoilov"). We reverse the order under review and remand with instructions for the trial court to address the merits of Ms. Samoilova's Motion to Vacate or Modify Order on Final Summary Judgment ("Motion to Vacate").

Judge Mavel Ruiz entered a final summary judgment in favor of Mr. Loginov and against Mr. Samoilov, which affects Ms. Samoilova's interest in a condominium she owns in Miami-Dade County. Ms. Samoilova filed the Motion to Vacate pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(4), asserting that the final summary judgment is void.

Following a hearing, Judge Carlos Lopez entered an unelaborated order denying Ms. Samoilova's Motion to Vacate. The transcript of the hearing reflects that Judge Lopez concluded that, as the successor judge, he lacked the authority to vacate or modify the final summary judgment entered by the predecessor judge, Judge Ruiz. As such, Judge Lopez did not reach the merits of Ms. Samoilova's Motion to Vacate.

Ms. Samoilova contends that Judge Lopez erred by denying the Motion to Vacate based on his determination that, as the successor judge, he lacked the authority to rule on the Motion to Vacate directed at the summary final judgment entered by the predecessor judge, Judge Ruiz. We agree.

A successor judge has the authority to rule on a rule 1.540 motion directed to a final judgment entered by a predecessor judge. In Paladin Properties v. Family Investment Enterprises, 952 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007), the appellant argued that the successor judge erred in considering the rule 1.540(b) motion to vacate a default final judgment because the motion to vacate should have been heard by the predecessor judge. In rejecting this argument, the Second District Court of Appeal explained as follows:

The Florida Supreme Court has held that a successor judge may revisit a final judgment entered by a predecessor judge when there is a motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540. Tingle v. Dade County Bd. of County Comm'rs, 245 So. 2d 76, 77–78 (Fla.1971). This is so "because a legally sufficient rule 1.540 motion by definition

...