Herbits v. City of Miami, 197 So. 3d 575

Background

Herbits filed a public-records suit against the City of Miami after a June 7, 2013 records request; an expedited hearing was held and the trial court reserved jurisdiction to determine compliance and attorney’s fees.
After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court entered a December 5, 2013 final order finding the City had substantially complied and denying Herbits’ fee request; Herbits timely appealed on January 2, 2014.
While that appeal was pending, Herbits served a new public-records request (January 14, 2014) and, on March 19, 2014, filed a mandamus motion in the trial court alleging noncompliance with the new request.
The trial court, proceeding despite the pending appeal, held a hearing and entered a May 8, 2014 writ of mandamus (ordering disclosure) and a June 3, 2014 order awarding attorney’s fees to Herbits.
The City then moved to vacate those orders, arguing the trial court lacked jurisdiction because Herbits’ January 2, 2014 appeal divested the trial court of authority; the trial court granted vacatur on October 13, 2014.
The district court affirmed, holding the trial court was divested of jurisdiction by the pending appeal and its subsequent orders were nullities.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Herbits’ January 2, 2014 appeal divested the trial court of jurisdiction over subsequent proceedings	Herbits: the December Order was a partial final judgment and did not bar the trial court from deciding an independent mandamus claim based on the January 14 request	City: the appeal of the December Order was final and divested the trial court of jurisdiction to enter further orders in that case	The court held the appeal divested the trial court of jurisdiction; orders entered while appeal pending were nullities
Whether Rule 9.110(k) (partial final judgment) saved the trial court’s post-appeal orders	Herbits: December Order was a partial final judgment that left independent claims for the trial court to decide	City: no independent claim existed at time of appeal; the January 14 request and mandamus motion were filed after notice of appeal	The court held Rule 9.110(k) inapplicable because the December Order disposed of the entire claim then pending; later claims could not preserve trial-court jurisdiction
Whether parties’ and trial court’s mistaken belief about jurisdiction can cure the lack of jurisdiction	Herbits: (implied) parties proceeded and court ruled on merits, so orders should stand	City: jurisdictional defect cannot be waived by parties’ conduct	The court held jurisdiction cannot be conferred by stipulation or mistake; orders entered without jurisdiction are void
Remedy for orders entered without jurisdiction (mandamus and fee awards)	Herbits: (result-oriented) sought to preserve the mandamus and fee awards despite appeal timing	City: sought vacatur of the post-appeal orders	The court affirmed vacatur; no alternate remedy available because orders were void for lack of jurisdiction

Key Cases Cited

Humana Med. Plan, Inc. v. Reale, 180 So. 3d 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (standard of review for questions of law)
Jory v. State, 699 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997) (notice of appeal divests trial court of jurisdiction)
Rehrer v. Weeks, 106 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958) (parties cannot confer jurisdiction by stipulation)
Almacenes El Globo De Quito, S.A. v. Dalbeta L.C., 181 So. 3d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (Rule 9.110(k) partial-final-judgment principles)
Jensen v. Whetstine, 985 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (partial final judgment must be independent of other pleaded claims)
Cicco v. Luckett Tobaccos, Inc., 934 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (same: independence requirement for Rule 9.110(k))
Lemon v. Groninger, 708 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (appellant must challenge all adverse portions of a final order on appeal)