Summary
noting that the judge had subject matter jurisdiction in the case and therefore had immunity, citing Stump
Summary of this case from Dykes v. HosemannOpinion
No. 81-1971.
September 21, 1982.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Lamar Warren, J.
Judith Herskowitz and Robert Herskowitz, in pro. per.
Robert A. Ginsburg, County Atty. and Roy Wood, Asst. County Atty., for appellees.
Before BARKDULL, SCHWARTZ and JORGENSON, JJ.
We agree with the trial court that the alleged fact that the appellees presided over the probate of an estate beyond the twelve month period provided by Sec. 733.901, Fla. Stat. (1979) and Fla. R.P. G.P. 5.400 did not render them without subject matter jurisdiction over the cause. Hence, the pertinent exception to the rule of absolute immunity from damage claims for judicial rulings made in an official capacity does not apply. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349, 98 S.Ct. 1099, 55 L.Ed.2d 331 (1978); Rivello v. Cooper City, 322 So.2d 602 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Ceinar v. Johnston, 134 Cal.App. 166, 25 P.2d 28 (1933). The dismissal with prejudice of the amended complaint is therefore
Affirmed.