Case ID: so2d_419/html/0418-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Judith HERSKOWITZ, individually and as Natural Guardian of Robert Herskowitz, and Mark Herskowitz, minor, by and through his Mother and Next Friend Judith Herskowitz, Appellants, v. Joseph NESBITT, Gene Williams, and Herbert M. Klein, individually and as Judges of the Circuit Court, In and For Dade County, Appellees.
    No. 81-1971.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Sept. 21, 1982.
    
      Judith Herskowitz and Robert Herskow-itz, in pro. per.
    Robert A. Ginsburg, County Atty. and Roy Wood, Asst. County Atty., for appel-lees.
    Before BARKDULL, SCHWARTZ and JORGENSON, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

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.