SKY ZONE LLC, ACTIVEPEN LLC and JONATHAN HOVELL v. MICHAEL RYAN WEEKLY , 259 So. 3d 890 ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •        DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
    FOURTH DISTRICT
    SKY ZONE LLC, ACTIVEPEN LLC and JONATHAN HOVELL,
    Appellants,
    v.
    MICHAEL RYAN WEEKLY,
    Appellee.
    No. 4D18-1583
    [December 19, 2018]
    Appeal of non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth
    Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael L. Gates, Judge; L.T. Case No.
    17-23604 CACE (12).
    Charles M-P George of Law Offices of Charles M-P George, Coral Gables,
    and Derek H. Lloyd, Christopher R. Cooper and Loanmy Saranova of
    Chartwell Law Offices, Miami, for appellants.
    Gary M. Farmer, Sr. and Gary M. Farmer, Jr. of Gary M. Farmer, Jr.,
    P.A., Lighthouse Point, F. Catfish Abbott and Brittany R. Ford,
    Jacksonville, and Dixie Dan Powell, Crestview, for appellee.
    GERBER, C.J.
    The defendants in a personal injury action appeal from the circuit
    court’s non-final order denying their motion to compel arbitration and stay
    litigation. The defendants’ motion and the plaintiff’s response raised
    several arguments of both a legal and evidentiary nature. The circuit court
    then held a hearing at which both legal arguments and evidence were
    presented. At the end of the allotted hearing time, the circuit court
    commented that the parties did not request an adequate amount of time,
    and the hearing ended abruptly without the court issuing an oral ruling.
    Shortly after the hearing, the circuit court entered an order summarily
    denying the defendants’ motion.
    Effective review of the circuit court’s order is impossible. While the
    parties presented legal and factual arguments during the hearing, the
    circuit court’s order contains no findings of facts, conclusions of law, or
    any basis for the circuit court’s decision. See Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v.
    Cullin, 
    2018 WL 5984111
     at *1 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 14, 2018) (“Because the
    trial court failed to state the basis for its decision and to make any factual
    findings on the record or in its final judgment, we are unable to conduct a
    meaningful appellate review.”); Exotic Motorcars and Jewelry, Inc. v. Essex
    Ins. Co., 
    111 So. 3d 208
    , 209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (“In cases where, as
    here, orders on review cannot be resolved without meaningful findings,
    effective review may be deemed impossible and the cause remanded for
    findings, notwithstanding that such findings may not be mandated by rule
    or statute.”).
    Ordinarily, we would remand the case to the circuit court to enter an
    amended order containing factual findings and legal conclusions to
    support its decision. See 
    id. at 209-10
     (“[W]e reverse and remand for the
    trial court to enter an amended final judgment and to make findings
    accordingly.”).
    However, because the judge who issued the order has since retired, we
    are left with no other choice but to remand the case for a new hearing
    before another judge who may issue an order capable of effective review.
    See Cullin, 
    2018 WL 5984111
     at *2 (“If the trial judge is no longer serving
    or is unable to enter an amended final judgment reflecting the basis for
    the decision, then a new trial must be conducted.”).
    Reversed and remanded for new hearing.
    CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur.
    *         *         *
    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 18-1583

Citation Numbers: 259 So. 3d 890

Filed Date: 12/19/2018

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 12/19/2018