THERMOPLASTIC & SIGNS, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, 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 a republication of an order without substantive change does not toll the time for filing an appeal. The notice of appeal was untimely.
Thermoplastic failed to timely appeal a circuit court's denial of certiorari. It filed a motion to set aside, which the court granted, reissuing the s…
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 Untimely Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
FLETCHER, Judge.
The appellant, Thermoplastic & Signs, Inc., [Thermoplastic] filed a notice of appeal of a purported final order of the circuit court acting in its appellate capacity. This Court’s review of the order must be sought by invoking our certiorari jurisdiction. Fla. R.App. P. 9.030(b)(2)(B). We treat the notice of appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari and dismiss the petition as untimely.
The record shows that after the circuit court appellate panel denied Thermoplastic’s petition for certiorari, Thermoplastic failed to file for review of the decision within thirty days of its rendition (because the notice and filing fee were sent to the wrong place). Thermoplastic later filed with the circuit court a “Motion to Set Aside Mandate and Re-date Order,” in which Thermoplastic conceded that it failed to timely file an appeal. The circuit court granted the motion, again denied Thermoplastic’s petition for certiorari in language identical to the first order, and rendered a second order. Within thirty days of this second order, Thermoplastic filed its notice of appeal.
The circuit court’s republication of its denial of certiorari without any change in substance from the original final order did not accomplish the circuit court’s goal of providing an extension of time for filing for review. As this court has held, the mere fact that a judgment previously entered has been reentered or revised in an immaterial way does not toll the time within which review must be sought. See B.G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 372 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). The notice of appeal having been filed more than thirty days after rendition of the original final order, we lack jurisdiction over it.
Petition for writ of certiorari dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
David M. Dresdner, M.D., P.A. v. The Charter OAK Fire Ins. Co., 972 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…t his appeal based on a finding of lawyer error amounting to excusable neglect. In this regard, Charter Oak has directed our attention to a Third District decision involving similar facts. In Thermoplastic & Signs, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 746 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), the appellant sought review in the Third District of an order of the circuit court acting in its appellate capacity. Id. at 1141. The appellant had failed to file its notice of appeal within thirty days of the rendition of the or…
-
State v. Wagner, 825 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…bsequent order contained no substantive changes; rather, it simply provided a chronological summary of the proceedings and a statutory citation to support why Wagner was entitled to be released. See Thermoplastic & Signs, Inc. v. Metro. Dade County, 746 So. 2d 1140, 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (holding that the refiling of an order without any substantive changes does not extend the time to seek review). We conclude that the January 23rd court minutes constitute an order. The parties were aware that the judge had…
-
Walker v. Walker, 4 So. 3d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…gment previously rendered, should the period within which an appeal must be taken or a petition for certiorari filed begin to run anew). See also Hammerl v. State, 779 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Thermoplastic & Signs, Inc. v. Metro. Dade County, 746 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Appeal dismissed. . A question arose whether or not the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit Clerk's practice of not docketing faxed notices, but only original hard copies, followed the Local Rules. We make no determination regarding thi…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- B. G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 372 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)