ERIC BRUCE SLOMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT CO., APPELLEE
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.
A prematurely filed notice of appeal does not subject the appeal to dismissal but remains in limbo until a final judgment is rendered, at which point it matures and vests jurisdiction in the appellate court.
Appellant filed a notice of appeal from a nonfinal order granting summary judgment. The appellate court requested counsel to obtain a final judgment, …
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 Premature Notice Of Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Chief Judge.
Appellant seeks review by plenary appeal of a nonfinal order, the decretal part of which provides: “The defendant’s motion for Summary Judgment is granted.” Thereafter the order recites the reasons for the court’s granting the motion. Although it seems clear that the circuit court intended the order to conclude the litigation, the order does not contain any magic words demonstrating finality. This jurisdictional defect was not noticed until this court began preparing the case for oral argument. Whereupon we requested counsel to obtain the entry of a final judgment. Counsel have complied with our request and a certified copy of said judgment has been filed here. Thus, we now acknowledge that jurisdiction over this cause is vested in this court.
Our authority for thus proceeding is Williams v. State, 324 So. 2d 74 (Fla.1975), in which the Supreme Court of Florida stated:
. we also hold that a notice of appeal which is prematurely filed shall not be subject to dismissal. Rather, such a notice of appeal shall exist in a state of limbo until the judgment in the respective civil or criminal case is rendered. 324 So. 2d at 79.
The wisdom of that rule is obvious. Dismissal of this appeal, particularly at this juncture when the case is perfected and ready for oral argument, would seem to be a nonproductive waste of counsels’ time and the parties’ money. Upon dismissal appellant would simply proceed to have the circuit court enter a final judgment, and then appellant would perfect a new appeal. Instead, we chose to make use of the rule laid down in Williams, supra, and hold that the notice of appeal prematurely filed in this cause remained in limbo until the final judgment was rendered, whereupon the notice of appeal matured and jurisdiction vested in this court.
Upon consideration of the merits of the appeal we find no reversible error demonstrated. Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
ANSTEAD and HERSEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Gries Inv. Co. v. Chelton, 388 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…Jurisdiction is now vested in us. Williams v. State, 324 So. 2d 74 (Fla.1975); Barnes v. Ross, 386 So. 2d 812 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); W. B. D., Inc. v. Howard Johnson Company, 382 So. 2d 1323 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Sloman v. Florida Power & Light Company, 382 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). We turn now to Gries’ appeal. The question here is whether Gries’ failure to appeal the February 1979 dismissal of the complaint rendered the trial court without jurisdiction to grant Gries leave to amend its complaint seven mo…1 / 2
-
Johnson v. First City Bank OF Gainesville & J. Emory Cross, 491 So. 2d 1217 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…? 2. If so, does this rule apply to situations not explicitly discussed in Williams, specifically the situation in which the trial court has granted a motion to dismiss, but has not effectively dismissed the case? Sloman v. Florida Power and Light, 382 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). 3. If an appellate court determines that it does not have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal of a nonappealable order, and the court is not precluded by Williams from dismissing the appeal, is it appropriate for the appellate…
-
Russell v. Russell, 507 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…ourt? 2. If so, does this rule apply to situations not explicitly discussed in Williams, specifically the situation in which the trial court has granted a motion to dismiss, but not effectively dismissed the case? Sloman v. Florida Power and Light, 382 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). 3. If an appellate court determines that it does not have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal of a non-appealable order, and the court is not precluded by Williams from dismissing the appeal, is it appropriate 1for the appellat…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 324 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1975)