GERTRUDE GIBBS, APPELLANT,
v.
RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, ETC., FRANK D. BELL, HEAVY EQUIPMENT SERVICES, INC., ETC., AND SCOTT AND JOBALIA, INC., ETC., 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.
Gertrude Gibbs appealed partial summary judgments dismissing certain claims in her two-count negligence complaint against an insurance company, the vehicle driver, and corporate defendants. The court dismissed the appeals sua sponte, holding that partial summary judgments are not appealable when remaining claims arise from the same factual circumstances.
Partial summary judgments dismissing claims are not appealable when remaining claims arise from the same set of facts and involve the same parties and injuries, regardless of whether the dismissed claims involve different legal theories or are punitive versus compensatory in nature.
[1] A partial summary judgment dismissing a claim for punitive damages, but not a claim for compensatory damages, is not an appealable final order when both claims arise from…
[2] An order dismissing one count of a multi-count complaint is not appealable, even if based on a different legal theory, if all counts arise from the same factual circumsta…
Previewing 2 of 3 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 dismissing a claim for punitive damages, but not a claim for compensatory damages, whether contained in a single count or in multiple counts, is not an appealable final order where the claims arise out of the same set of facts.”
Establishes the core rule that partial dismissals of related claims are not appealable as final orders
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGibbs filed a two-count complaint arising from a vehicle collision. Count one sought compensatory and punitive damages against defendant Bell (the dri…
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 Negligent Entrustment cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, Judge.
We dismiss the consolidated appeals, sua sponte, because the partial summary judgements appealed from are not appealable.
An order dismissing a claim for punitive damages, but not a claim for compensatory damages, whether contained in a single count or in multiple counts, is not an appealable final order where the claims arise out of the same set of facts. Kingsland v. National Advertising Company, 384 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Similarly, an order dismissing one count of a multi-count complaint is not appealable, even though based on a different legal theory, where the different counts all arise out of the same factual circumstances. North Indialantic Homeowners Association v. Bogue, 390 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
The first count of this two-count complaint sought compensatory and punitive damages against defendant Bell as the driver of a vehicle involved in the collision with plaintiffs vehicle, and sought similar damages against the corporate defendants and their insurer, on two theories: (1) ownership of the vehicle Bell was driving; and (2) vicarious liability as his employer. The second count sued only the corporate defendants on the theory of negligent entrustment. The court granted the partial summary judgment in favor of the corporate defendants as to punitive damages claimed in the first count, and granted the partial summary judgment in their favor as to both the compensatory and punitive damages claimed in the second count. There still remains for determination under the first count the claim for compensatory and punitive damages against defendant Bell and the claim for compensatory damages against the corporate defendants. The claims which were dismissed all arise out of the same accident, involve the same parties and the same injuries and are clearly interrelated with those claims which remain. Venezia A., Inc. v. Askew, 314 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied, 333 So. 2d 465 (Fla.1976).
The appeal is dismissed without prejudice to an appeal of the issues raised here following final judgment.
Appeal DISMISSED.
DAUKSCH, C. J., and SHARP, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Orlovsky v. Solid Surf, Inc., 405 So. 2d 1363 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…he trial court’s order did not completely dismiss it from the case. Accordingly, the order is not final as to Solid Surf and, as such, is not appealable. Weltz v. Mann, 383 So. 2d 324 (Fla.5th DCA 1980). See also Gibbs v. Reliance Insurance Company, 399 So. 2d 1108 (Fla.5th DCA 1981). We, therefore, will not review the propriety of the trial court order insofar as it struck appellant’s punitive damage claim. After reviewing the order insofar as it dismissed Spence from the lawsuit, we reverse. Essentially, ap…
-
W. Am. Ins. Co. v. Luann Nixon, 489 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…eal appeal cautioned against in Mendez v. West Flagler Family Association, Inc., 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1974), should not be presently entertained. See Gause v. First Bank of Marianna, 442 So. 2d 1062 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Gibbs v. Reliance Insurance Co., 399 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). We therefore dismiss the appeal, without prejudice, as being premature. APPEAL DISMISSED. DOWNEY and DELL, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Venezia A., Inc. v. Reubin O'Donovan Askew, 314 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
- Blanche Harris Kingsland v. Nat'l Advertising Co., 384 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Codomo, 390 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)