Opinion
Nos. 95-1432, 95-870.
April 3, 1996. Rehearing Denied May 1, 1996.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Philip Bloom, Judge.
Kris E. Penzell, Miami Beach, for appellant.
Keith Mack Lewis Cohen Lumpkin and Sara B. Clasby, Miami, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GODERICH and GREEN, JJ.
We hold that the trial court properly vacated a garnishment judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540 (b)(5) because the underlying debt owed by the garnishee to the plaintiff-garnishor's judgment debtor had been fully satisfied. See § 77.083, Fla.Stat. (1995); First Florida Bank, N.A. v. R.D.P. of Naples, Inc., 573 So.2d 1025 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Carpenter v. Benson, 478 So.2d 353 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), review denied, 488 So.2d 829 (Fla. 1986); United Presidential Life Ins. Co. v. King, 361 So.2d 710 (Fla. 1978). See generally Preferred Mut. Ins. Co. v. Davis, 629 So.2d 259 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Weitzman v. F.I.F. Consultants, Inc., 468 So.2d 1085 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), review denied, 479 So.2d 117 (Fla. 1985). On the cross-appeal, we likewise find no error.
RULE 1.540 RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT, DECREES, OR ORDERS
* * * * * *
(b) Mistakes; Inadvertence; Excusable Neglect; Newly Discovered Evidence; Fraud; etc. On motion and upon such terms as are just, the court may relieve a party or a party's legal representative from a final judgment, decree, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:
* * * * * *
(5) that the judgment or decree has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment or decree upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment or decree should have prospective application.
Affirmed.