JENNIFER CASSELL, MOTHER, APPELLANT,
v.
EUGENIO ERQUIAGA, FATHER, 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.
Jennifer Cassell appealed a March 17, 2009 order modifying custody and child support obligations, but the Florida First District Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was untimely filed, exceeding the 30-day deadline required for non-final orders.
The court lacks jurisdiction to review the appeal because appellant failed to file the notice of appeal within 30 days of the order's rendition as required by Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. The motion for rehearing did not suspend rendition because motions for rehearing are not authorized for non-final orders.
[1] An order that contemplates additional judicial labor to establish a final amount of child support is a non-final order.
[2] A notice of appeal from a non-final order must be filed within 30 days of the order's rendition.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“The March 17, 2009 order was a non-final order because it contemplated additional judicial labor to establish the amount of child support payable by appellant which would eventually culminate in an appealable final order.”
Establishes why the order was non-final, triggering the 30-day appeal deadline rather than allowing a later appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn March 17, 2009, the trial court entered a Final Order of Modification that modified custody of the parties' minor child and terminated appellee Eug…
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
On October 13, 2009, Jennifer Cassell filed a notice of appeal seeking review of a “Final Order of Modification” entered below on March 17, 2009. The order, among other things, modified custody of the parties’ minor child and terminated the child support obligations of appellee, Eugenio Erquiaga. As to the child support, the order provided that the appellant “shall owe child support to Father [appellee], based on Florida Child Support Guidelines” and directed the parties to submit a joint child support worksheet and proposed order for the court’s consideration. Sua sponte this court issued an order directing appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Having considered appellant’s response to the show cause order, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
The March 17, 2009 order was a non-final order because it contemplated additional judicial labor to establish the amount of child support payable by appellant which would eventually culminate in an appealable final order. Although the March 17, 2009 order was an appealable non-final order under rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iii), Florida Rules of Appel*144late Procedure, a notice of appeal was required to be filed within 30 days of the rendition of the order. Rule 9.130(b), Fla. R.App. P. Further, appellant’s argument that her motion for rehearing suspended rendition of the March 17 order is without merit. Appellant’s motion for rehearing was not authorized because it was directed toward a non-final order, Ward v. Bragg, 957 So.2d 670, 670-71 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); Wagner v. Bieley, Wagner & Assoc., Inc., 263 So.2d 1 (Fla.1972), and, accordingly, did not suspend rendition. See Fla.R.App. P. 9.020(h).
HAWKES, C.J., WEBSTER, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
AmMED Surgical Equip., LLC v. Prof'l Med. Billing Specialists, LLC, 162 So. 3d 209 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…ll, 402 U.S. 637, 644, 91 S.Ct. 1704, 29 L.Ed.2d 233 (1971). The construction of rule 9.130(b) is quite straightforward. The thirty-day deadline is jurisdictional; an appeal filed after the deadline must be dismissed. See, e.g., Cassell v. Erquiaga, 28 So. 3d 143, 143-44 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).3 Federal case law construing the relevant provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, while not voluminous, also seems clear. A notice of appeal filed in a federal appellate court following the filing of a bankruptcy petition is…
-
Caruso v. Caruso, 93 So. 3d 532 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…PER CURIAM. The Court has determined that the Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage is not a final order because it contemplates the exercise of further judicial labor on the non-collateral issue of child support. See Cassell v. Erquiaga, 28 So. 3d 143 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as premature. WOLF, ROWE, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.…
-
Doukas v. Doukas (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)…ealable non- final order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iii), because it required the parties to mediate the issue of timesharing before the trial court would adjudicate the issue of child support. See Cassell v. Erquiaga, 28 So. 3d 143, 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (holding that an order is non-final if it “contemplate[s] additional judicial labor”). However, rather than filing a timely interlocutory appeal within 30 days after rendition of this order as required by Florida Rule of App…
Authorities Cited
- Wagner v. Bieley, 263 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1972)
- Ward v. Bragg, 957 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)