Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
RICHARD DIMOSI DIASOLWA v. ALEXA BURNEIKIS
Citation: Not availableDocket: 21-0899
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; November 29, 2022; Florida; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
The Third District Court of Appeal of Florida issued an opinion on November 30, 2022, regarding an appeal by Richard Dimosi Diasolwa (the Father) against Alexa Burneikis (the Mother), stemming from a paternity action. The Mother filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, arguing lack of jurisdiction due to the Father's failure to timely appeal the October 22, 2019 Final Judgment. The Father claimed he did not receive notice of this judgment. The court found the appeal untimely because the Father did not appeal within 30 days or file a timely post-judgment motion to toll the rendition period as required by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(b). The court examined the procedural history, noting that the Mother requested a correction of a typographical error in the Final Judgment on November 25, 2019, and the Father's counsel communicated that they had not received the judgment. However, the Father did not pursue a motion for relief from judgment as outlined in Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.540(b)(4). The court emphasized that a judgment can be void if due process regarding notice is violated, but it did not find that the trial court had determined whether the Father received notice. The Amended Final Judgment issued on November 25, 2019, merely corrected a clerical error and did not constitute a new final judgment for appeal purposes. The court ruled that the initial October Final Judgment remained operative, and since the amendment did not materially alter the judgment, the appeal was deemed untimely. Consequently, the court granted the motion to dismiss and dismissed the appeal without prejudice, allowing the Father to seek relief from judgment under the appropriate rules. The court refrained from commenting on the merits of any future motion for relief.