PEDRO MENDEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
SHOMA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND TRANSPORTATION CASUALTY, APPELLEES
PEDRO MENDEZ, APPELLANT,
SHOMA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND TRANSPORTATION CASUALTY, APPELLEES
899 So. 2d 510
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2005)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Because the order being appealed herein dismisses the petition for benefits without prejudice and contemplates the refiling of the petition or the filing of a motion for entry of a final order, we dismiss this appeal as being taken from a nonfinal, nonappealable order. See generally Croes v. University Community Hospital, 886 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Zito v. Jeff Harding, Inc., 870 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). We likewise decline appellant’s request that we undertake certiorari review of the order, since appellant has failed to demonstrate that the remedy afforded by appeal from a final order will be inadequate.
BARFIELD, ALLEN and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Euceda v. Se. Pers. Leasing, Inc., 33 So. 3d 115 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…because the order on appeal, which dismisses Claimant’s petitions for benefits without prejudice and notes the statutory limitations period to amend the petition has not yet run, is a non-final, non-appeal-able order. See Mendez v. Shoma Dev. Corp., 899 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (“Because the order being appealed herein dismisses the petition for benefits without prejudice and contemplates the refiling of the petition ..., we dismiss this appeal as being taken from a nonfinal, nonappealable order.”); Cro…
Authorities Cited
- Shauna Croes v. Univ. Cmty. Hosp. & Sentry Ins. Co., 886 So. 2d 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Zito v. Jeff Harding, Inc., 870 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)