JOAN HARRIMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
ELMER GOFF, MARIO VALDEZ, TONYA KENT VALDEZ, AIG INSURANCE (ILLINOIS NATIONAL) C/O ALDAY INSURANCE (AGENT), APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Interlocutory Rulings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the appellant’s response to the Court’s order of February 28, 2006, the Court has determined that the order does not constitute a final order of dismissal. Specifically, although the order grants motions to dismiss with regard to defendants Elmer Goff and AIG Insurance, the lower tribunal has not yet dismissed them as parties to the action. See generally Benton v. Moore, 655 So. 2d 1272, 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Furthermore, the remainder of the order on appeal merely contains interlocutory rulings not yet ripe for appellate review. See, e.g., Pagenet, Inc. v. Dep’t of Revenue, 843 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In light of the dismissal, the appellant’s Motions for Enlargement of Time to Submit Brief, filed on March 3, 2006, and April 24, 2006, are denied as moot.
ALLEN, WOLF, and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blake v. State, 939 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…y, while the standard of review to be applied to the trial court’s factual findings is whether competent, substantial evidence supports those findings, the application by the trial court of the law to the facts is reviewed de novo. See Utu v. State, 929 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Houston v. State, 925 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 935 So. 2d 1220 (Fla.2006); Dewberry v. State, 905 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Young v. State, 803 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); State v. Kindle, 782 So. 2d 9…
-
D.B.P. v. State, 31 So. 3d 883 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…factual findings of the trial court is whether competent, substantial evidence supports the findings, the trial court’s application of the law to the facts is reviewed de novo. See Bevard v. State, 976 So. 2d 1163 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Utu v. State, 929 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Houston v. State, 925 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 935 So. 2d 1220 (Fla.2006); Young v. State, 803 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); State v. Kindle, 782 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); McMaster v. State, 780 So. 2d 1…
-
State v. Wissell Irizarry, 948 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…rdingly, while the standard of review to be applied to factual findings of the trial court is whether competent, substantial evidence supports the findings, the trial court’s application of the law to the facts is reviewed de novo. See Utu v. State, 929 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Houston v. State, 925 So. 2d 404 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 935 So. 2d 1220 (Fla.2006); Dewberry v. State, 905 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Young v. State, 803 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); State v. Kindle, 782 So. 2d 9…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Benton v. Moore, 655 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Pagenet, Inc. v. State, 843 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- KOW, Inc. v. Weight Control Ctrs., Inc., 843 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)