Law Clerk
In JJTB, Inc. v. Stephen, 50 Fla. L. Weekly S188 (Fla. 2025), the Florida Supreme Court resolved a conflict between district courts over whether “case jurisdiction” is waivable, and held that it is, unlike subject matter jurisdiction.
The case arose after JJTB initiated a foreclosure action. The trial court initially denied foreclosure by final order. Two years later, JJTB filed an amended complaint, effectively restarting the foreclosure. The mortgagor did not raise jurisdictional objections at that time, nor in their answer. Only after judgment was entered in JJTB’s favor did the mortgagor appeal, arguing for the first time that the trial court lacked “subject matter jurisdiction.”
The Second DCA agreed and reversed, citing the longstanding principle that subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived. But the Florida Supreme Court took a more nuanced view, distinguishing between subject matter jurisdiction, which stems from the court’s constitutional authority to hear a type of case, and case jurisdiction, which relates to the court’s authority over a specific proceeding based on procedural posture.
The Court noted that while subject matter jurisdiction is fundamental and cannot be waived, case jurisdiction can be waived if not timely raised. Because the mortgagor failed to raise the issue at the trial level, the appellate court should not have disturbed the judgment. In this case, the trial court lacked case jurisdiction as once the final order denying a judgment of forcelsoure was entered, the trial court no longer exercised case jurisdiction. However, because case jurisdiction is waivable, the mortgagor’s failure to raise this defense precluded them from raising the issue on appeal.
The Court also cautioned against using procedural technicalities like “case jurisdiction” as strategic tools, warning that parties should not be allowed to “lie in wait,” participate in proceedings, and then use a jurisdictional argument as a backdoor on appeal.
This case highlights the importance of care legal research, argumentation, and proper pleading. A simple mistake in neglecting to raise the appropriate argument at the right time can mean the difference between winning and losing a case. Even experienced attorney’s can fail to understand the distinctions between case jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction.
At Boatman Ricci, we help clients and co-counsel structure pleadings and pretrial strategies to avoid costly appellate reversals.
Want a second set of eyes on a case? Contact our team to review your options and help develop the best strategy.
THIS BLOG IS INTENDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE. THE READER SHOULD CONSULT WITH KNOWLEDGEABLE LEGAL COUNSEL TO DETERMINE HOW APPLICABLE LAWS APPLY TO SPECIFIC FACTS AND SITUATIONS. BLOG POSTS ARE BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT INFORMATION AT THE TIME THEY ARE WRITTEN. SINCE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE LAWS OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES MAY HAVE CHANGED SINCE PUBLICATION, PLEASE CALL US TO DISCUSS ANY ACTION YOU MAY BE CONSIDERING AS A RESULT OF READING THIS BLOG.