MARTIN Z. MARGULIES, APPELLANT/PETITIONER,
v.
THE HONORABLE DAVID L. LEVY, JUDGE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; THE HONORABLE FREDERICK N. BARAD, JUDGE OF THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENTS, AND REGINA TISIKER MARGULIES, APPELLEE/RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Extraordinary Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Martin Margulies, the petitioner in a dissolution action, alternatively appeals from an interlocutory order vacating a previously entered interlocutory order which affirmed the validity of an antenuptial agreement; or seeks review of the second order by certiorari; or seeks a writ of prohibition forbidding the judge from entering the second order. Margulies also seeks a writ of prohibition forbidding the successor judge from revisiting the issue of the validity of the antenuptial agreement.
Interlocutory orders are modifiable by the trial judge at any time before entry of a final judgment. Whitaker v. Wright, 100 Fla. 282, 129 So. 889 (1930); Alabama Hotel Co. v. J.L. Mott Iron Works, 86 Fla. 608, 98 So. 825 (1924); Holman v. Ford Motor Co., 239 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970). The order in question is a non-ap-pealable interlocutory order over which we have no jurisdiction. We decline to grant the extraordinary relief requested. See Shapiro v. Shapiro, 432 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
Appeal dismissed. Certiorari denied. Prohibition denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bettez v. The City OF Miami, 510 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…ion as a motion for rehearing under Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.530 cannot change this result as the motion was, in substance, a proper motion for reconsideration. See Alabama Hotel Co. v. J.L. Mott Iron Works, 86 Fla. 608, 98 So. 825 (1924); Margulies v. Levy, 439 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Nelson v. Cravero Constructors, Inc., 117 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); see also Commercial Garden Mall v. Success Academy, Inc., 453 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Second, the record demonstrates, without dispute, that the a…
-
The Pub. Health Tr. OF Dade Cnty. v. Diaz, 529 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 1988)…tunc language as superfluous and pointed out that the trial court had the authority to vacate its interlocutory order upon sufficient grounds at any time before final judgment. Whitaker v. Wright, 100 Fla. 282, 129 So. 889 (1930); Margulies v. Levy, 439 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Holman v. Ford Motor Co., 239 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970). However, the court reversed the dismissal on the premise that the trial court had abused its discretion in waiting eleven months before vacating the stay order and dism…
-
Abamar Hous. & Dev., Inc. v. Lisa Daly Lady Decor, Inc., 724 So. 2d 572 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…correctly assert that the trial court has authority to revisit its previous orders prior to entry of a judgment, Kienzle v. Kienzle, 556 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Bettez v. City of Miami, 510 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Margulies v. Levy, 439 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), in vacating its prior order and denying the motion to disqualify, the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law resulting in prejudice that can’t be remedied on appeal. Double T Corp. v. Jalis Dev., Inc., 682 So…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ala. Hotel Co. v. The J. L. Mott Iron Works, 86 Fla. 608 (Fla. 1923)
- Holman v. Ford Motor Co., 239 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)
- Whitaker v. Wright, 100 Fla. 282 (Fla. 1930)
- Tortoriello v. State, 432 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)