RODOLFO CORDOBA, PABLO CORDOBA, AND PEGGY CORDOBA, APPELLANTS,
v.
STRAWBERRY FIELDS HOUSING CORP., APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Timeliness Of Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
An examination of the amended complaint discloses that Count I for breach of contract and Count II for conversion are based upon the identical facts and circumstances; and Count III is for fraud based upon the same facts and circumstances. Consequently, the causes of action are all interrelated and within the meaning of Mendez v. West Flagler Family Ass’n, 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1974). The order granting defendant’s motion to dismiss as to Counts II and III and transferring Count I to the County Judges’ Court constituted an interlocutory order. The Rules of Civil Procedure do not authorize the filing of a motion for rehearing directed to an interlocutory order. Consequently, the notice of appeal lodged in this court was untimely filed and the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction thereof. The appellee’s motion for rehearing is granted. The order of this court denying the appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal is vacated. The appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal is granted without prejudice to the appellants’ remedy in the county court.
It is so ordered.
HUBBART, NESBITT and JORGENSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Norwegian Cruise Lines, Ltd. v. Gregorio Zareno, 712 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…state statute’s procedural requirement of showing a reasonable basis for punitive damages at the complaint stage, neither conflicts with, nor adds to, substantive federal maritime standards for punitive damages. See Royal Caribbean Corp. v. Modesto, 614 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review denied, 626 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 1993). Therefore Section 768.72 does apply to maritime claims filed in state courts, and a defendant may not be subjected to financial worth discovery until the trial court has first made an af…
-
Juneau Tanker Corp. v. Sims, 627 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…remains “in navigation” as a matter of law. We find no merit to defendant’s second point on appeal and affirm without discussion. On plaintiffs cross-appeal, however, we reverse on the issue of attorney’s fees. See Royal Caribbean Corp. v. Modesto, 614 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part for proceedings consistent herewith. FRANK, C.J., ALTENBERND, J., and FARNELL, CROCKETT, Associate Judge, concur. . It is of no moment that he was not a union member and lacked s…
-
Fay Nicoll v. Magical Cruise Co., 110 So. 3d 98 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…S. Aster, 978 F. 2d 462, 475 (9th Cir.1992); Sosebee v. Rath, 893 F. 2d 54, 56-57 (3d Cir.1990). Although not cited by either party, we are aware that our decision is in conflict with our sister court’s decision in Royal Caribbean Corp. v. Modesto, 614 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). We disagree with that decision for the same reasons expressed in Garan, Inc. v. M/V Aivik, 907 F.Supp. 397, 400 (S.D.Fla.1995). We note that a panel of the Third District, in a nonfinal opinion, has recently called Modesto into q…
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
- Mendez v. W. Flagler Fam. Ass'n, Inc., 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1974)