Court itself, and is generally for the purpose of “setting the record straight.” ’ ” Progressive Plumbing, Inc. v. Dixie Constr. Prods., 912 So.2d 646, 647 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (quoting Danner v. Danner, 206 So.2d 650, 654 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)). Here, the trial court mistakenly sent Mr. Boelter an erroneous order granting the motion for rehearing, then exacerbated that mistake by delivering the correct order to an internal communications box at a circuit court clerk branch office rather than serving it in a manner authorized by Florida Family Law Rule of Procedure 12.080 or Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.080. Lack of timely notice of a ruling due to the court’s mistake is grounds for relief from judgment under rule 1.540(b). See Gibson v. Buice, 381 So.2d 349, 351 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (<HOLDING>); Snelson v. Snelson, 440 So.2d 477, 477 (Fla.
holding that the trial court should have granted a motion for relief from judgment when it was the trial courts failure to serve the defendant with notice of the final judgment as required by rule 1080h1 that prevented the defendant from timely appealing holding that a notice of appeal is timely when filed before final judgment is entered by the district court holding that a premature notice of appeal from an interlocutory summary judgment was deemed effective when the trial court granted a severance and rendered the summary judgment final holding that the appellate court should have construed the notice of appeal from the denial of a motion to vacate the judgment as an attempt to appeal from the underlying judgment holding that a motion to intervene filed after final judgment should have been granted