INTERNATIONAL STUDIO APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
SUN HOLIDAY RESORTS, INC., ETC., ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
The parties attempted to extend the time for filing a notice of appeal through a stipulation, but the notice was still filed after the original and st…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Timeliness Of Notice Of Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
LETTS, Judge.
This appeal must be dismissed.
The facts and issues in this cause have brought forth much labor, discussion and delay, all of which have come to naught.
It transpires that the jurisdiction of this court to entertain the appeal ended on March 31st, 1977, Fla.App.R. 3.2(b) (1962).
Notwithstanding the above, no appeal was taken within that period. Instead on March 30,1977, the litigants stipulated to a further thirty day extension because:
“. . . the parties are now engaged in settlement negotiations in the above styled cause and . . . desire that the negotiations continue without jeopardizing the legal right of either party.”
Thereafter the notice of appeal was actually filed on May 2, 1977.
We have no jurisdiction. There is little doubt that the respective attorneys acted with the best of intentions and it is unjust that the appellees should thus triumph despite their willingness to extend the allowable period. Nonetheless as our Supreme Court said in Southeast First National Bank of Miami v. Herin, 357 So. 2d 716, 718 (Fla. 1978), quoting an earlier case:
Despite what might appear to be the imposition of a hardship, we are compelled to conclude that under applicable rules the timely filing of a notice of appeal at the place required by the rules is essential to confer jurisdiction on the appellate court. We have on numerous occasions held in similar situations that jurisdiction could not even be conferred by consent of the parties, when the notice of appeal was not filed as required by applicable rules, (emphasis supplied)
Needless to say we are bound by the foregoing quoted dictates which do not represent any departure from existing law and are but the most recent restatement of a long established concept. Nonetheless it is unfortunate that we should have taken so long to uncover this fatal discrepancy.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
MOORE, J., and CROSS, SPENCER C., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Se. First Nat'l Bank OF Miami v. The Honorable William A. Herin, 357 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 1978)