Legal Opinion

Townsend v. Lane

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 1, 1995No. 94-1913PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

AFFIRMED. Flemenbaum v. Flemenbaum, 636 So.2d 579 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (To entitle a movant to an evidentiary hearing, a rule 1.540(b)(3) motion must specify the fraud and explain why the fraud, if it exists, would entitle the movant to have the judgment set aside); Shienvold v. Habie, 627 So.2d 1203, 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (“Because appellant did not specifically plead the two grounds that would have formed a basis for relief — fraud and coercion — the trial court correctly dismissed the petition for failure to state a cause of action.”), rev. denied, 640 So.2d 1107 (Fla.1994).

AFFIRMED.

PETER…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Flemenbaum v. FlemenbaumDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
  2. Shienvold v. HabieDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Robinson v. WeilandDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006
  2. Dempsey v. Law Firm of Cauthen & Odham, P.A.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API