Coleman Holdings Inc. v. Morgan Stanley
20 So. 3d 952 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) (October)
After the district court reversed a judgment in its favor, the plaintiffs requested that the trial court set aside the original judgment and grant a new trial. The motion noted the earlier finding that the defendant had committed discovery misconduct and argued that it was the equivalent of a fraud on the court. The defendant had previously been sanctioned for this conduct. The trial court denied this motion, and the district court affirmed that decision. It noted that the trial court has broad discretion in considering such motions, and that this discovery misconduct had already been dealt with at trial. Also, the alleged fraud did not affect the facts that led to the reversal of the original judgment.