KARIN M. STAS, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
CLARA POSADA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1999-09-01
No. 99-1106
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GERSTEN, and GREEN, JJ.
760 So. 2d 954 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1999) Caution
Cited by 22 cases
Topics
Standing To Appeal

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Standing To Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
GERSTEN, J.

GERSTEN, J.

We grant Clara Posada’s motion to dismiss appellants Karin Stas and Juan Mueller from the instant appeal for lack of standing. Appellant Karin Stas has no ownership interest in the property awarded to the plaintiff and, consequently, is not affected by the judgment entered below. With no interest at stake, she is precluded from seeking appellate review. See Credit Indus. Co. v. Remark Chem. Co., 67 So. 2d 540 (Fla.1953); King v. Brown, 55 So. 2d 187 (Fla.1951); Estate of Rose v. First Nat’l Bank of Miami, 165 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964).

Appellant Juan Mueller was not a party below and made no effort to intervene in the action. Consequently, he too is precluded from seeking appellate review. See Forcum v. Symmes, 101 Fla. 1266, 133 So. 88 (1931); Barnett v. Barnett, 705 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Orange County v. Game & Fresh Water Fish Comm’n, 397 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); see also Marino v. Ortiz, 484 U.S. 301, 108 S.Ct. 586, 98 L.Ed.2d 629 (1988) (holding that, under the federal rules of procedure, nonparties aggrieved by a judgment should seek intervention for purposes of appeal, in the trial court, prior to filing an appeal); Wags Transp. Sys., Inc. v. City of Miami Beach, 88 So. 2d 751 (Fla.1956) (holding that nonparties may intervene in an action for appellate purposes after a judgment has been entered where justice so requires).

Accordingly, Karin Stas and Juan Mueller are hereby dismissed from the instant appeal.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (13 total)

  • Perez v. Perez, 769 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
    …9.020, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. It is well established that only parties (or their representatives) who have suffered an adverse affect in the lower tribunal cause of action are entitled to participate in an appeal. See Stas v. Posada, 760 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Orange County, Fla. v. Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, 397 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Florida Civil Practice Guide, Vol. 6, § 143.03 (Lexis Publishing 1998). Rule 9.020 defines the “parties” to an appeal as the “appel…
  • Bondi v. Tucker, 93 So. 3d 1106 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
    …2004) (“This appeal is hereby dismissed. Appellate review is limited to the parties in the lower tribunal. As David E. Morrell was not a party to the proceedings below, he cannot participate in appellate review.” (citation omitted)); Stas v. Posada, 760 So. 2d 954, 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (“Appellant Juan Mueller was not a party below and made no effort to intervene in the action. Consequently, he ... is precluded from seeking appellate review.”). Even class members who are already parties and bound by a judg…
  • Penabad v. A.G. Gladstone Assocs., Inc., 823 So. 2d 146 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
    …miss this appeal for lack of standing. At the time of the underlying motion, Alicia Penabad had no ownership interest in the subject property because she had executed a quit claim deed transferring her interests to a third party. See Stas v. Posada, 760 So. 2d 954, 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999) (appellant with no ownership interest in property was not affected by order and thus precluded from seeking appellate review). Furthermore, Novel Penabad was not a party to the underlying motion to dissolve a lis pendens and,…

Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw