Stewart v. Berger
Decision Date | 11 March 1959 |
Parties | J. W. STEWART, Appellant, v. Sam B. BERGER and Irene F. Leposky, as Acting Secretary of Jafra Steel Corporation, a Florida corporation, Appellees. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
John M. Murrell, John M. Murrell, Jr., and J. M. Flowers, Miami, for appellant.
Joseph Pardo, Miami, for appellees.
The facts of this case amply appear from opinions, upon previous appearances of the parties in this Court. 1
This appeal is from an ordr, 2 dated October 14, 1958, which purports to set aside the final decree entered in the cause on September 6, 1955. This decree was never appealed, and the only activity in the proceeding during the interim period was by way of a petition for supplementary injunctive relief which was granted but vacated upon appeal in June 1958. 3
While, as already indicated, no appeal was taken from the final decree entered in September, 1955, its terms and effect were reviewed in the light of the full record brought here in connection with the ensuing injunction, and the following analysis was made:
4
There is in the record now before us no basis for a contrary finding as to the nature of the decree entered. The recitations of the court in its order vacating that decree are somewhat misleading, but our conclusions hereinafter stated need not be bolstered by a contest over the precise terms or underlying predicate for the decree, or the effect of appellate review of the injunctive matter. 5
The order under consideration shows on its face a fatal insufficiency. The decree assailed was, under firmly established rules of law, beyond the power of the court to alter or set aside by direct action upon the grounds specified, and was, of course, impervisous to collateral attack except upon the theory that it was void ab initio. 6
'In those cases in which the court interferes after the term, to vacate or annul a judgment, the interference can only be justified on the ground that the judgment was procured in such a manner as to indicate that it was not intended to be authorized by the court, or if authorized by the court, that it is nugatory for want of jurisdiction. * * *' 7 No contention is made that the circumstances surrounding the entry of the decree were such as to affect the court's jurisdiction to decide the issues then before it, and even if, contrary to record indications, there existed some misapprehension as to the significance or effect of related litigation, it would necessarily be an intrinsic and unverifiable judicial 'mistake' not subject to change under our cases. 8
The order is accordingly quashed and the cause remanded with directions that the petition be dismissed.
2 Reading in part as follows:
'This Court, as a Court of equity sitting in chancery feels that from all of the circumstances that have preceded the facts in ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Verdi v. Metropolitan Dade County
...to the circuit court appellate division precludes him from collaterally attacking the findings in the action below. Stewart v. Berger, 109 So.2d 765, 766 (Fla.1959); see also Key Haven Associated Enters. v. Board of Trustees, 427 So.2d 153, 157-58 (Fla.1982) (limiting litigants, who wish to......
-
Turkey Creek, Inc. v. City of Gainesville
...after all, was a consent judgment--was not challenged on appeal, and may not now be collaterally attacked. Stewart v. Berger, 109 So.2d 765 (Fla.1959). Notwithstanding this, it would clearly be unduly harsh for the environmental integrity of a municipality to be undermined by a past decisio......
-
Weymer's Estate, In re, 495
...of an intrinsic and unverifiable judicial mistake and as such collides with the settled law of this state as expressed in Stewart v. Berger, Fla.1959, 109 So.2d 765, and Morrison v. Morrison, Fla.App. 1960, 122 So.2d 199. Further, I do not understand that there has been any relaxation of th......
-
Morrison v. Morrison, C-76
...herein expressed. Reversed. STURGIS and CARROLL, DONALD K, JJ., concur. 1 Mabson v. Christ, 96 Fla. 756, 119 So. 131.2 Stewart v. Berger, Fla.1959, 109 So.2d 765.3 Quality Courts United v. Jones, Fla.1952, 59 So.2d 20.4 F.S. Sec. 65.14, ...