MARVIN SINGER, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA PAVING COMPANY, 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.
The court held that the judgment and order awarding damages and denying attorney's fees were not appealable because a related claim remained pending in the trial court.
[1] A judgment is not appealable when a legally interrelated compulsory counterclaim remains pending in the trial court.
[2] Appellate courts generally do not permit piecemeal appeals when claims are legally interrelated, involve the same transaction, and the same parties remain in the lawsuit.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSinger failed to pay Florida Paving for driveway installation, leading to a breach of contract suit. Singer filed a counterclaim for improper installa…
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 Interrelated Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Singer appeals a final judgment awarding Florida Paving Company, Inc. [Florida Paving] damages for breach of contract and an order denying him attorney’s fees. Finding that the judgment and order are not appealable, we do not reach the merits of the trial court’s rulings.
The action below was predicated upon Singer’s failure to pay Florida Paving the total contract price upon which the parties agreed for the installation of a new driveway. Singer filed a compulsory counterclaim, alleging damages resulting from Florida Paving’s improper installation of the driveway. Although the counterclaim was dismissed as untimely, Singer was permitted to maintain an independent action on the claim. Singer v. Florida Paving Co., 459 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (dismissed counterclaim may be refiled as independent action while initial lawsuit pending). That action remains pending.
In Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Authority v. Metropolitan Dade County, 469 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), we reiterated the pertinent principle:
In determining the finality of an order, judgment, or decree, the test employed by the appellate court is whether the order appealed constitutes an end to the judicial labor in the trial court, and nothing further remains to be done to terminate the dispute between the parties directly affected. S.L. T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1974); SCI, Inc. v. Aneco Co., 410 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Generally, piecemeal appeals will not be permitted where claims are legally interrelated, involve, in substance, the same transaction, and where the same parties remain in the lawsuit. S.L.T. Warehouse Co.; SCI, Inc.; Collins v. Hunt, 404 So. 2d 375 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).
Singer’s claim against Florida Paving and Florida Paving’s claim against Singer are based on “intertwining and interrelated factual and legal issues.” Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Authority at 814. The pendency of the remaining claim renders the appeals premature. We therefore hold that the judgment and order in question are not appealable.
Appeals dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crest Pontiac, Inc. v. Claudette A. Robinson and Darlene Little, 495 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…e Company v. Webb, 304 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1974); but cf. Sarasota Cloth Fabric & Foam, Inc. v. Benes, 482 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Consequently, the order awarding attorney’s fees is similarly not appealable. Cf. Singer v. Florida Paving Company, 469 So. 2d 188 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Department of Professional Regulation v. Rentfast, Inc., 467 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).1 As regards the partial summary judgment entered in Case No. BJ-320, we hold that the several counts are rife with issues of credibilit…
Authorities Cited
- S. L. T. Warehouse Co. v. Wilmott Webb, 304 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 1974)
- Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Auth. v. Metro. Dade Cnty. & City of Miami, 469 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
- SCI, Inc. v. Aneco Co., 410 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- Singer v. Fla. Paving Co., Inc., 459 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Collins v. Hunt, 404 So. 2d 375 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)