Edward Wallace v. Tina Keldie, 249 So. 3d 747

In June 2016 Wallace sued Keldie for negligence arising from a May 2014 car collision, claiming permanent neck and low-back injuries from the second accident.
During deposition Wallace acknowledged a 1980s roof fall but testified he had been "healed" and had no back problems or treatment since 2000.
Medical records (Oct. 2013 and May 2014 ER visits) documented chronic low-back pain, a herniated disc, and severe pain shortly before and after the accidents.
Keldie moved to dismiss with prejudice for fraud on the court based on the contradictions between Wallace’s deposition and his medical records.
At an evidentiary hearing Wallace admitted the medical history but claimed his deposition misstatements were due to poor memory from mental health issues, alcohol, and medication; the trial court found his deposition testimony "patently false" and that he had fraudulently concealed prior injuries.
The First DCA affirmed dismissal with prejudice, rejecting Wallace’s preservation and abuse-of-discretion arguments and addressing a procedural substitution issue after Keldie’s death by deciding the appeal on briefs.

Issue	Wallace's Argument	Keldie's Argument	Held
Whether trial court made adequate factual findings supporting dismissal	Order lacked detailed findings; Chacha requires more	Court held an evidentiary hearing, made oral and written findings	Findings were sufficient and issue not preserved by Wallace
Whether Wallace’s deposition contradictions established fraud on the court	Discrepancies due to poor memory, not intent to deceive	Deposition materially contradicted contemporaneous medical records; intentional concealment	Clear and convincing evidence supported a finding of fraud; trial court credited circumstantial factors (criminal history, admissions)
Whether dismissal with prejudice was an abuse of discretion	Dismissal was too harsh; lesser sanctions should apply	False testimony about core injury justified dismissal to protect judicial integrity	Dismissal with prejudice was within the trial court’s discretion for fraud that permeated the proceeding
Procedural effect of appellee's death on appeal and substitution	Proceed on briefs without opening probate; appoint guardian ad litem/substitute	Appellee’s estate/personal representative is proper real party in interest; oral argument canceled	Appeal decided on briefs; motion to appoint ad litem denied; substitution requires probate/personal representative when estate not opened

Tramel v. Bass, 672 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (standard for review of factual findings supporting dismissal)
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Reeves, 92 So. 3d 249 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (abuse-of-discretion review for dismissal as sanction)
Hutchinson v. Plantation Bay Apartments, LLC, 931 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (trial court’s inherent authority to dismiss for fraud)
Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (definition of fraud on the court and dismissal when false testimony strikes at central issues)
Distefano v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 846 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (false testimony about damages/injuries supports dismissal)
Ramey v. Haverty Furniture Co., 993 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (trial court credibility assessments support sanction decisions)
Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115 (1st Cir. 1989) (deterrence and preservation of judicial integrity justify harsh sanctions)
Chacha v. Transportation USA, Inc., 78 So. 3d 727 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (distinguished; criticized where no evidentiary hearing or findings)
Gomez v. Fradin, 199 So. 3d 554 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (procedural discussion on substitution/appointment of ad litem after death of party)