GONZALEZ ENGINEERING, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
MIAMI PUMP AND SUPPLY CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, 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.
Court dismissed appeal for lack of jurisdiction where appellant sought review of a post-final judgment order awarding attorney's fees under section 57.105 but not fixing the amount, holding such orders are not appealable.
A post-final judgment order determining entitlement to attorney's fees under section 57.105 but not fixing the amount is not appealable.
[1] A post-final judgment order determining a party's entitlement to attorney's fees under section 57.105 but not fixing the amount is not appealable.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Gonzalez Engineering sought review of a post-final judgment order that determined appellee Miami Pump and Supply Co. was entitled to attorne…
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 Finality Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
The appellant seeks review, purportedly pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv), of a post-final judgment order which determined that the appel-lee was entitled to attorney’s fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1993), against the appellant, but did not fix the amount. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
In reaching this determination, we agree with and follow the fourth district’s analysis in Winkelman v. Toll, 632 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), which fully discusses and resolves the present issue adversely to the appealability of such an order. Accord Southern Management & Inv. Corp. v. Escandar, 529 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Hobbs v. Hobbs, 518 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988); see also Avis Rent A Car Sys., Inc. v. Newman, 641 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Adlow, Inc. v. Mauda, Inc., 632 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). Although there is language to the contrary in Blattman v. Williams Island Associates, Ltd., 592 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), upon which the appellant relies, it is apparent that, since the appeal was in fact dismissed as untimely, the statement in question is no more than dictum. Because it contains no underlying reasoning and does not cite to our contrary, earlier opinion in Southern Management, it is unpersuasive dictum, at that.
Appeal dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
McILVEEN v. McILVEEN, 644 So. 2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…ves with the other district courts of appeal, which have held that an order which only determines the right to attorney’s fees without setting the amount is a nonap-pealable, nonfinal order. See Gonzalez Engineering, Inc. v. Miami Pump & Supply Co., 641 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Winkelman v. Toll, 632 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Trans Atlantic Distributors, L.P. v. Whiland & Co., S.A, 646 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Hobbs v. Hobbs, 518 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Accord Cokonougher v. Cokonou…
-
State v. Frazier, 697 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…at 728; Madrigal, 545 So. 2d at 392, including submission to the order below specifically enforcing the undertaking. Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971); Hunt v. State, 613 So. 2d 893 (Fla.1992); Buffa v. State, 641 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). Finally, even if neutral principles of law did not, as they do, require this result, the state, above all parties, must keep its word. See State v. Hargis, 328 So. 2d 479, 481 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976) (Rawls, J., dissenting). Its at…
-
Lidsky Vaccaro & Montes, P.A. v. Morejon, 813 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…See Stoker v. Stoker, 742 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Ritter v. Ritter, 690 So. 2d 1372 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Easley, McCaleb & Stallings, Ltd. v. Gibbons, 667 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996); Gonzalez Eng’g., Inc. v. Miami Pump & Supply Co., Inc., 641 So. 2d 474 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Demaio v. Coco Wood Lakes Ass’n, Inc., 637 So. 2d 369 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). We agree. From our reading of Fortune’s brief submitted to the circuit court panel, it is clear that Fortune’s position on the appeal below was that the…
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Winkelman v. Toll, 632 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Hobbs v. Hobbs, 518 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Adlow, Inc. v. Mauda, Inc., 632 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
- AVIS Rent A CAR Sys., Inc. v. Newman, 641 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- S. Mgmt. & Inv. Corp. v. Escandar, 529 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Murray Blattman under that certain Tr. Agreement dated December 18 v. Williams Island Assocs., Ltd., 592 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)