Hannah v. Malkani
On rehearing, the Sixth DCA vacated its citation PCA and issued a written opinion holding that a res judicata/collateral estoppel argument raised for the first time in a motion for rehearing of a summary judgment order was unpreserved for appeal. Following its earlier decision in Melrose Ventures, the court affirmed and certified direct conflict with the Fifth DCA's decisions in Kawsar and Elser, which held a new argument can be preserved by raising it first in a motion for rehearing.
Key facts
- Hannah sued Malkani; the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Malkani.
- Hannah failed to raise res judicata and collateral estoppel arguments in her opposition to the summary judgment motion but raised them for the first time in her motion for rehearing.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This deepens an express DCA split on a recurring and high-stakes appellate practice question: whether an argument first raised in a motion for rehearing below is preserved. Practitioners in the Sixth DCA must raise all… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.