If you are going through a divorce, you may have heard of the term "law of the case" and wondered what it means and how it affects your case.
The “law of the case” doctrine is a legal principle that states that once an appellate court has decided an issue of law or fact in a case, that decision should be followed by the same court or a lower court in the same case. The purpose of the doctrine is to promote consistency, finality, and judicial economy in litigation.
The “law of the case” doctrine applies to issues of law. Issues of law are questions about the interpretation or application of the law, such as the validity of a contract or the admissibility of evidence.
One of the most common ways that the law of the case doctrine is invoked is when a party appeals a decision of a trial court to a higher court, such as a court of appeals or a supreme court. When a higher court reviews a lower court’s decision, it can affirm, reverse, or modify the decision, or remand the case back to the lower court for further proceedings.
When a higher court affirms a lower court’s decision, it means that it agrees with the lower court’s reasoning and outcome, and the decision becomes final and binding on the parties. When a higher court reverses a lower court’s decision, it means that it disagrees with the lower court’s reasoning or outcome, and the decision is overturned and replaced by the higher court’s decision. When a higher court remands a case back to the lower court, it means that it sends the case back to the lower court for further action, such as a new trial or a reconsideration of some issues.
When a higher court issues a decision on an appeal, that decision becomes the law of the case for the issues that were raised and decided on appeal. This means that the lower court and the parties must follow the higher court’s decision on those issues. The lower court and the parties cannot relitigate or revisit the issues that were decided by the higher court on appeal.
In Florida, the law of the case doctrine is limited to rulings on questions of law presented and considered on a former appeal. SC Mota Assocs. L.P. v. Mota Pizza Rustica Corp., 358 So. 3d 823. The doctrine provides that all questions of law that have been decided by the highest appellate court become the law of the case, which, except in extraordinary circumstances, must be followed in subsequent proceedings, both in the lower and the appellate courts. Dorsey v. State, 149 So. 3d 144 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
The law of the case doctrine does not preclude a lower court from passing on issues that have not necessarily been determined and become the law of the case. SC Mota Assocs. L.P. v. Mota Pizza Rustica Corp., 358 So. 3d 823 (Fla 3rd DCA 2023). This means that if a legal issue was not decided in a previous appellate proceeding, a lower court is not precluded from ruling on it There are exceptions to the doctrine. One generally accepted occasion for disturbing settled decisions in a case is when there has been an intervening change in the law underlying the decision. Nixon v. State, 327 So. 3d 780. This means that if there has been a change in the fundamental controlling legal principles, the law of the case doctrine must give way. Nixon v. State, 327 So. 3d 780.
There are two other exceptions to the confines of the doctrine: first, a trial court is not bound to follow the prior ruling if the facts upon which the prior ruling was made are no longer the facts of the case; and, second, an appellate court may reconsider and correct an erroneous ruling that has become the law of the case where a manifest injustice would result. State v. Parker, 275 So. 3d 189 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)
.
Moreover, an appellate court has the power to reconsider and correct erroneous rulings in exceptional circumstances and where reliance on the previous decision would result in manifest injustice. Gorman v. State, 253 So. 3d 740.
The main difference between appellate decisions and final judgments in terms of the law of the case doctrine is that appellate decisions create the law of the case for the issues that were decided on appeal, while final judgments create the law of the case for the issues that were decided in the judgment. This means that appellate decisions have a broader and more binding effect than final judgments, because they apply to both the lower court and the parties, while final judgments only apply to the parties.
Another difference between appellate decisions and final judgments in terms of the law of the case doctrine is that appellate decisions are more difficult to change or challenge than final judgments because they require a higher level of review and a stronger justification. For example, to change or challenge an appellate decision, a party may have to seek a rehearing, a review by a higher court, or a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court, which are all discretionary and rare. To change or challenge a final judgment, a party may have to file a motion for a new trial, a motion for relief from judgment, or a motion to modify or enforce the judgment, which are all more common and easier to obtain.
The law of the case doctrine is a legal principle that states that once a court has decided an issue in a case, that decision should be followed by the same court or a lower court in the same case unless there is a compelling reason to change it. The doctrine applies to both appellate decisions and final judgments in divorce cases, but they have different effects and implications. Appellate decisions create the law of the case for the issues that were decided on appeal, and they are more binding and harder to change than final judgments. Final judgments create the law of the case for the issues that were decided in the judgment, and they are less binding and easier to change than appellate decisions. Understanding the difference between the two can help you make informed and strategic decisions in your divorce case.