Curbelo v. Ullman

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that judicial error such as a mistaken view of the law is not subject to correction under rule 1.540(b)(1)
• holding that “[m]istakes which result from oversight, neglect or accident are subject to correction under rule 1.540(b)(1)” but “judicial error . . . is not one of the circumstances contemplated by the rule” (citations omitted)
• explaining that a \mistaken view of the law\ is not a \mistake\ as contemplated by Rule 1.540 (citation omitted)
• explaining that a \mistaken view of the law\ is not a \mistake\ as contemplated by Rule 1.540 (citation omitted)
• determining trial court order which mistakenly adopted and ratified child visitation schedule not subject to relief under Rule 1.540(b)
• observing: “As correctly noted by the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Fiber Crete Homes, Inc., v. Division of Administration, 315 So.2d 492, 493 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).