MANNA PROVISIONS COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
TED BLUME, A/K/A THEODORE BLUME AND ETHEL O. BLUME, AS CO-PARTNERS D/B/A CENTRAL FLORIDA WHOLESALE, 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 the appeal was untimely because a motion for rehearing on an interlocutory venue order does not toll the time for filing an appeal.
Appellant appealed an order transferring venue. Instead of filing a timely appeal, appellant filed a motion for rehearing, which was denied. Appellant…
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 Tolling Of Appeal Time cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have before us an appeal from a trial court order transferring venue of the present action from Duval County, Florida, to Orange County, Florida. The appeal is sua sponte dismissed.
The order transferring venue was rendered January 19, 1982. Appellant then had 30 days within which to file its notice of appeal to this court. Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(b). Instead, appellant filed a Motion to Change Order of Transfer of Venue to Denial of Motion to Transfer Venue or to Make Venue an Issue for Trial, which essentially amounted to a motion for rehearing on the order granting the venue change. This motion was denied by the trial court on February 12, 1982. Thereafter, on March 10, 1982, appellant filed this appeal.
A motion for rehearing directed to an interlocutory order changing venue is not authorized under the rules of practice. Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.530(a), (b); Home News Publishing Company v. U-M Publishing, Inc., 246 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). Thus, Appellant’s Motion to Change Order of Transfer of Venue, etc., did not toll the running of time for seeking review of the order transferring venue. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g); Home News Publishing, supra. This appeal challenging the correctness of the trial court’s transfer of this cause to Orange County was, therefore, untimely filed, 50 days after rendition of the order transferring venue, and is accordingly
DISMISSED.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and LARRY G. SMITH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Buford A. Green v. State, 450 So. 2d 1275 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…. Unauthorized motions do not delay rendition of orders. See Crippen v. Sunland Center, 372 So. 2d 63 (Fla.1979); Joseph v. State, 437 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Smith v. Weede, 433 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); Manna Provisions Co. v. Blume, 417 So. 2d 832 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); City of Melbourne v. Floyd, 415 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Hofer v. Gil De Rubio, 409 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Guzman v. State, 364 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).…
-
Jake & THE FAT MAN Bike Week USA, Inc. v. Biker Design, Inc., 919 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…). Motions for rehearing of nonfinal orders do not toll the time for taking an appeal. Bennett v. Bennett, 645 So. 2d 32, 32 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Adlow, Inc. v. Mauda, Inc., 632 So. 2d 714, 714-15 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Manna Provisions Co. v. Blume, 417 So. 2d 832, 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Because Jake filed an appeal of a nonfi-nal order more than thirty days following its rendition, we lack jurisdiction over the order on appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. DISMISSED. GRIFFIN and PALMER, JJ., co…
-
Rahaim v. Dep't of Corr. (Fla. 5th DCA 2021)…s last order. We conclude that Rahaim’s Motion to Retain Venue by Exceptions and to Quash Order to Transfer essentially amounted to a motion for rehearing of the trial court’s sua sponte orders transferring venue. See Manna Provisions Co. v. Blume, 417 So. 2d 832, 833 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (treating Appellant’s “Motion to Change Order of Transfer of Venue to Denial of Motion to Transfer Venue or to Make Venue an Issue for Trial” as a motion for rehearing on the order granting the venue change). Pertinent here…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Home News Publ'g Co. v. U-M Publ'g, Inc., 246 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)