Nos. 90-2338 and 90-2416 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Aug 7, 1991
This case presents a non-final appeal from two orders denying motions for relief from two judgments.
Procedurally, the case involved a suit by appellee, Saab against Pompano Marine-Blue Lagoon for breach of contract, fraud and conversion, which resulted in a jury verdict on April 21, 1989, awarding Saab $111,000 compensatory damages and $100,-000 punitive damages. Thereafter, final judgment was entered against Pompano Marine on June 1, 1989 for said sums, plus interest. The court determined Saab was entitled to attorney’s fees, so the judgment reserved jurisdiction to determine the amount thereof. Upon motion, the trial court, on August 16, 1989, set the fees and costs for Saab at a total of $113,732.70, together with $800 in expert witness fees. An amended judgment to add a provision for interest was entered on August 18, 1989.
The trial court then entered an order on October 16, 1989, impleading the third-party defendants (appellants here) and described the property of the impleaded defendants which is in controversy as being various items of personal and real property
It may be that the attorney’s fees awarded Saab in the judgment in question were, as a matter of law, improper and/or that they are not properly recoverable in these supplementary proceedings. Nevertheless, appellants have not demonstrated reversible error in the trial court’s refusal to grant their motion for relief based upon the legal theories invoked.
Accordingly, the orders appealed from are affirmed.
. Subject matter jurisdiction has been variously described as follows:
[Jurisdiction of the subject matter] is that sovereign authority, conferred upon a court by constitution, either directly or by authorized statute, to make adjudications, or binding decisions, as to controversies within a certain class of cases or causes.
Florida Power and Light Company v. Canal Authority, 423 So. 2d 421" court="Fla. Dist. Ct. App." date_filed="1982-11-24" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/fla-power--light-co-v-canal-authority-etc-1150850?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="1150850">423 So.2d 421 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
Jurisdiction over the subject matter does not mean jurisdiction of a particular case, but rather jurisdiction of the class of cases to which the particular controversy belongs.
Payette v. Clark, 559 So. 2d 630" court="Fla. Dist. Ct. App." date_filed="1990-02-16" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/payette-v-clark-1906842?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="1906842">559 So.2d 630, 632 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).