Service Experts, LLC v. Northside Air Conditioning & Electrical Service, Inc.
2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 17693
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2010Background
- Service Experts, LLC filed suit in June 2007 against three former employees and Northside Air Conditioning & Electrical Service, Inc. for various torts and misappropriation claims.
- In March 2009, after discovery closed and offers of judgment were made, Service Experts dismissed the case without prejudice by notice of voluntary dismissal.
- Northside moved to strike the dismissal or to enter a dismissal with prejudice, alleging fraud on the court from two affidavits and arguing the common law exception to voluntary dismissal.
- The trial court could not determine fraud on the record, but concluded the defendants had acquired substantive rights by summary judgment motion, offers of judgment, and alleged fraud, and gave options to proceed to trial or hold an evidentiary hearing; it reinstated the case.
- Service Experts appealed, and the appellate court converted the appeal to a writ of prohibition, finding the common law Ormond Beach exception did not apply and that the trial court acted in excess of jurisdiction by reinstating the case.
- Upon review, the court held the common law exception did not apply, rejected the fraud-based rationale, vacated the reinstatement, and remanded with directions to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Ormond Beach common law exception applies | Service Experts: no substantial rights were vested; dismissal should be allowed. | Northside: argued the common law exception applied due to potential prejudice and rights in the case. | Common law exception did not apply |
| Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to reinstate after voluntary dismissal | Service Experts: dismissal ended jurisdiction; no reinstitution should occur. | Northside: court could reinstate under fraud/related theories. | Trial court acted in excess of jurisdiction; writ of prohibition appropriate |
| Whether fraud on the court supported striking the notice of dismissal or required an evidentiary hearing | Service Experts: absence of proven fraud precludes striking; no basis for fraud-based relief. | Northside: alleged fraud warranted an evidentiary hearing. | Fraud allegations insufficient to support striking under this record |
| Whether the remedy of dismissal without prejudice was improper given the procedural posture | Service Experts: rule 1.420(a) allows voluntary dismissal before summary judgment hearing; no proper basis to force continuation. | Northside: dismissal without prejudice caused inequity and prejudice to defendants. | Dismissal without prejudice permitted; no equitable basis to bar it |
Key Cases Cited
- Ormond Beach Assocs., Ltd. v. Citation Mortgage, Ltd., 835 So.2d 292 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (common law exception to right of voluntary dismissal requires substantial prejudice or merits)
- Patterson v. Allstate Insurance Co., 884 So.2d 178 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (arbitration right and finality can invoke Ormond Beach exception when merits await disposition)
- Miller v. Fortune Ins. Co., 484 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 1986) (voluntary dismissal deemed a proceeding; direct review may be appropriate in some contexts)
- Select Builders of Florida, Inc. v. Wong, 367 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (fraud on the court can be a basis to strike a voluntary dismissal in limited circumstances)
- Romar Int’l, Inc. v. Jim Rathman Chevrolet/Cadillac, Inc., 420 So.2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (fraud on the court as a narrowly recognized exception to dismissal rule)
- Ambory v. Ambony, 442 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (voluntary dismissal deprives trial court of jurisdiction, but Rule 1.540 may preserve limited relief)
- Dunkin’ Donuts Franchised Rests., LLC v. 330515 Donuts, Inc., 27 So.3d 711 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (distinguishes limits of Rule 1.540 relief after voluntary dismissal)