ERNIE SGRIGNUOILI, TRUSTEE, APPELLANT,
v.
MAURICE BARAKAT, 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.
Florida appellate court dismissed appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the trial court's order granting a motion for judgment on the pleadings was interlocutory and not reviewable under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure.
An order that merely grants a motion for judgment on the pleadings without dismissing the complaint, cause, or party, or entering final judgment is interlocutory and not appealable.
[1] An order granting a motion for judgment on the pleadings that does not dismiss the complaint or enter final judgment is interlocutory and not appealable under Florida Rul…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“an order 'which merely grants a motion — and does not go further and actually dismiss the complaint, the cause, or a party, or enter judgment for the movant — is nothing more than an interlocutory one which cannot provide the foundation for a claim of res judicata.'”
Court explaining the distinction between interlocutory and final orders in the context of motions for judgment on the pleadings.
Sgrignuoli brought a specific performance action involving the sale of land against Barakat. The trial court granted Barakat's motion for judgment on …
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 Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ernie Sgrignuoli, who was the plaintiff below in a specific performance action involving the sale of land, appeals an order of the trial court granting the defendant Maurice Barakat’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. The decretal portion of the order under review states: “ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings be hereby granted.”
We have recently held, based on a long line of authority, that an order “which merely grants a motion — and does not go further and actually dismiss the complaint, the cause, or a party, or enter judgment for the movant — is nothing more than an interlocutory one which cannot provide the foundation for a claim of res judicata.” Donnell v. Industrial Fire & Casualty Co., 378 So. 2d 1344, 1346 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) and cases collected. The order in the instant case merely grants a motion for judgment on the pleadings, but does not dismiss the complaint, the cause, or a party, or enter judgment for the movant. As such, it is an interlocutory, rather than a final order. Our review of Fla.R.App.P. 9.130 reveals that an order granting a motion for judgment on the pleadings is not one of the non-final, interlocutory orders which are reviewable by appeal in this court. See Art. V, § 4(b)(1), Fla.Const. Accordingly, we sua sponte dismiss the instant appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Appeal dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dyes v. Dyes, 454 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…1176 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). The order partially granting appel-lee’s motion for judgment on the pleadings is likewise neither a final order nor a nonfi-nal, interlocutory order reviewable pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.130. Sgrignuoili v. Barakat, 384 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The appeal is dismissed. BOOTH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.…
-
Zaremba v. Harbison, 462 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)…that the merits of appellees’ Motion to Dismiss Appeal should now be addressed. This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. We do not have jurisdiction. Fla.R.App.P. 9.130, and Sgrignuoili v. Barakat, 384 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). We choose not to treat the appeal as a petition for certiorari as we might do under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.040. We are of the opinion that appellant will have a full and adequate remedy via plenary appeal. Powel…
-
Sampson v. Grp. 1 FL Holdings (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)…isdiction. See Dyes v. Dyes, 454 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (dismissing an appeal of an order partially granting a motion for judgment on the pleadings as neither a final order nor a nonfinal, interlocutory order, citing Sgrignuloili v. Barakat, 384 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1980)). B.L. THOMAS, KELSEY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________ Brent M. Buck…
Authorities Cited
- Maltzman v. Pickett, 378 So. 2d 1344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)