103 So. 3d 866
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- Advanced Chiropractic and Rehabilitation Center Corporation filed a second-tier petition for writ of certiorari directed at a circuit court decision.
- The circuit court reversed county court final orders on an issue not preserved in the county court or raised in Advanced’s appellate brief.
- In the county court, Advanced sued United Automobile Insurance Co. for PIP benefits; settlement was reached for $4,128 plus $1,980 prejudgment interest.
- Advanced moved under Rule 1.540(b) to vacate the dismissal order; hearing involved unsworn witnesses and affidavits; the court granted relief and later awarded fees and costs.
- United appealed, arguing: (i) the county court abused its discretion on timeliness of the fee motion and on excusable neglect; (ii) the circuit reversed on different grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether reversal based on unpreserved errors violated due process | United argues the circuit relied on unpreserved errors. | Advanced contends the issues were properly before the circuit on review. | Yes; due process was violated by reversing on unpreserved, unargued grounds. |
| Whether second-tier certiorari can reverse for unpreserved reasons | United asserts the panel properly reviewed the preserved issues only. | Advanced asserts limited, proper scope of certiorari was exceeded. | Second-tier certiorari is narrowly confined and cannot reverse for unpreserved grounds. |
| Whether the tipsy coachman doctrine justified affirming for a different basis | United contends reversal was improper as the record did not support it on those grounds. | Advanced argues the correct result could be affirmed on any valid basis in the record. | The tipsy coachman doctrine does not permit reversal on an unpreserved, unargued basis. |
Key Cases Cited
- Custer Med. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 62 So.3d 1086 (Fla.2010) (limits of second-tier certiorari review; due process focus)
- Achord v. Osceola Farms Co., 52 So.3d 699 (Fla.4th DCA 2010) (limits of second-tier certiorari review)
- Robertson v. State, 829 So.2d 901 (Fla.2002) (tipsy coachman doctrine; alternative grounds require record support)
- Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Radio Station WQBA, 731 So.2d 638 (Fla.1999) (right result on correct basis; when legitimate grounds exist, affirm on record)
- State v. Baez, 894 So.2d 115 (Fla.2004) (dissent; limits of tipsy coachman application)
- Ramos v. Philip Morris Cos., 743 So.2d 24 (Fla.3d DCA 1999) (error not raised in brief is waived)
- Chaachou v. Chaachou, 135 So.2d 206 (Fla.1961) (contemporaneous objection rule)
- Lesperance v. Lesperance, 257 So.2d 66 (Fla.3d DCA 1971) (contemporaneous objection rule; waiver of error)
- MCR Funding v. CMG Funding Corp., 771 So.2d 32 (Fla.2000) (subject matter jurisdiction; timing of rulings)