# 14302 Marina San Pablo Place SPE, LLC v. VCP-San Pablo, Ltd.

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · July 27, 2012 · 92 So. 3d 320

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4875429

## Case

- **Full name:** 14302 MARINA SAN PABLO PLACE SPE, LLC v. VCP-SAN PABLO, LTD., a Florida limited partnership, John D. Rood, individually, John D. Rood, as Trustee of the John D. Rood Revocable Trust U/A/D 1/26/88, as amended, Marina San Pablo Master Association, Inc., a Florida corporation, and Marina San Pablo Condominium Association, Inc., a Florida corporation
- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** July 27, 2012
- **Citations:** 92 So. 3d 320; 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 12204; 2012 WL 3048216
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Benton, Ray, Rowe
- **Cited by:** 14 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4875429

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction .to entertain a “motion for clarification” on the issue of liability for condominium fees and assessments that was filed three months after entry of judgment
- holding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a “motion for clarification” on the issue of liability for condominium fees and assessments that was filed three months after entry of judgment
- explaining “case jurisdiction” and citing cases establishing that under precedent from this Court, lack of case jurisdiction cannot be waived
- discussing “case jurisdiction” or “procedural jurisdiction” to enter subsequent orders on the merits after previous entry of final judgment

## Opinion text

PER CURIAM.
This appeal is from an order declaring that Appellant is liable to the Marina San Pablo Master Association for certain fees and assessments. The trial court entered this order in the context of a foreclosure case, upon a motion for clarification filed more than three months after entry of the final judgment. Because the period for rehearing or clarification had passed and the trial court was not ruling on a motion filed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540, the court lacked jurisdiction to enter the order at issue. See Pruitt v. Brock, 437 So.2d 768, 773 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (quoting St. Cloud Utilities v. Moore, 410 So.2d 973 , 974 n. 3 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)). Accordingly, we QUASH the order on appeal, leaving the final judgment of foreclosure undisturbed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4875429. Public record. Not legal advice.