GLADYS ARANGO, APPELLANT,
v.
CESAR CAINAS, 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.
Appellant Gladys Arango appealed an order awarding attorney's fees to defendant Cesar Cainas following a grant of summary judgment on a civil theft count. The court reversed and remanded, holding that attorney's fees awards must be entered only after all claims in a multi-count complaint have been resolved, not prematurely after disposition of a single count.
An attorney's fee order must be entered only at the conclusion of the case after all counts of the complaint have been disposed of, not prematurely after disposition of a single count.
[1] An order granting summary judgment on a single count of a multi-count complaint is not an appealable final order.
[2] An order granting summary judgment on a single count of a multi-count complaint is not an appealable non-final order under Fla. …
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 intelligence“Such an order should be entered only at the conclusion of the case below after all the counts of the complaint have been disposed of.”
Establishes the core holding that attorney's fees awards must await final disposition of all claims, not be entered prematurely after partial judgment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceArango filed a multi-count complaint against Cainas alleging civil theft, conversion, and bailment arising from the same transaction. The trial court …
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 Appealability Of Non-Final Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order which awards attorney’s fees for the defendant Cesar Cainas after granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the civil theft count of a multi-count complaint in which two other counts for conversion and bailment remain pending below, all of which counts arise out of the same transaction. We decline to pass on the merits of the summary judgment entered on the civil theft claim as this order has not and could not be appealed because it is neither an appealable final order, S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1974); compare Mendez v. West Fla-gler Family Ass’n, 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1974), nor an appealable non-final order under Fla. R.App.P. 9.130(a). The plaintiff, Gladys Ar-ango, may claim error and attack the propriety of the summary judgment on the civil theft count only upon a proper appeal from a final judgment or final order when entered at the conclusion of this case.
We conclude, however, that the attorney’s fee order under review should be reversed because it was prematurely entered. Such an order should be entered only at the conclusion of the case below after all the counts of the complaint have been disposed of. See Maguer v. Merrill Lynch Realty/MCK, Inc., 585 So. 2d 1040, 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), rev. denied, 598 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 1992); Division of Admin., State Dep’t of Transp. v. Decker, 450 So. 2d 1220,1222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Brinker v. Ludlow, 379 So. 2d 999, 1001-02 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), approved, 403 So. 2d 969 (Fla.1981).
The final order awarding attorney’s fees is reversed and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- S. L. T. Warehouse Co. v. Wilmott Webb, 304 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 1974)
- Mendez v. W. Flagler Fam. Ass'n, Inc., 303 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1974)
- Brinker v. Ludlow, 379 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Ludlow v. Brinker, 403 So. 2d 969 (Fla. 1981)
- Cross v. Navarro, 585 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Magner v. Merrill Lynch Realty/MCK, Inc., 585 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Division OF Administration v. Decker, 450 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)