Legal Opinion

Herskowitz v. Nesbitt

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 21, 1982No. 81-1971PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

We agree with the trial court that the alleged fact that the appellees presided over the probate of an estate beyond the twelve month period provided by Sec. 733.-901, Fla.Stat. (1979) and Fla. R.P. & G.P. 5.400 did not render them without subject matter jurisdiction over the cause. Hence, the pertinent exception to the rule of absolute immunity from damage claims for judicial rulings made in an official capacity does not apply. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978); Rivello v. Cooper City, 322 So.2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Ceinar v. Johnston, 134 Cal.App.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stump v. SparkmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Rivello v. Cooper CityDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975
  3. Ceinar v. JohnstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dykes v. HosemannCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
  2. Dykes v. HosemannCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
  3. Dykes v. HosemannCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API