E.H.G. Enterprises, Inc. v. Amstell
E.H.G. Enterprises, Inc. v. Amstell
Opinion of the Court
Defendant, E.H.G. Enterprises, Inc., appeals an order denying its motion to vacate final summary judgment.
Plaintiff-appellee I. Joel Amstell filed an amended complaint for breach of contract, quantum meruit, violation of the Bulk Sales Act and fraudulent conveyance against defendants: E.H.G. Enterprises of Florida, Inc., E.H.G. Financial Corporation,
In entering the summary final judgment against appellant, the trial judge determined that appellant’s affirmative defenses with respect to jurisdiction lacked merit. At this point the proper appellate procedure would have been to file a petition for rehearing within 10 days pursuant to Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.530 or perfect an appeal to this court. See State ex rel. Eli Lilly and Company v. Shields, 83 So.2d 271 (Fla. 1955). Having failed to do either of the above, we find the trial judge was eminently correct in denying appellant’s motion to vacate filed some five months after the entry of the summary judgment. See Shelby Mutual Ins. Co. of Shelby, Ohio v. Pearson, 236 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1970).
Affirmed.
. Both totally owned subsidiaries of appellant E.H.G. Enterprises, Inc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.