ITZHAK BAK, APPELLANT,
v.
JOYCE BAK, 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 motion for reconsideration does not suspend rendition of a non-final order for purposes of appeal deadlines.
[1] A notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days of the date an order is rendered, meaning signed and filed with the clerk.
[2] A motion for reconsideration does not suspend rendition of a non-final order for purposes of appeal, as rehearing is not authorized for non-final orders.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceItzhak Bak appealed a trial court's order denying his motion for reconsideration of a status report order regarding reunification. The notice of appea…
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 Rendition Of Order cases and more on FLexlaw
Itzhak Bak appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of a status report order regarding reunifi*524cation. We dismiss Itzhak’s appeal as untimely.
A notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days of the date an order is rendered, i.e., signed and filed with the clerk. Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b), 9.020(h). The status report order Itzhak seeks to appeal was rendered on April 19, 2012, and the notice of appeal was filed on June 8, 2012, or fifty-one days after the status report order was rendered.
Before appealing, Itzhak moved for reconsideration of the status report order, and the trial court entered an order denying the motion. The order denying the motion for reconsideration was rendered on May 14, 2012, which was less than thirty days before the notice of appeal was filed. But while a timely motion for rehearing will suspend rendition of a final order until entry of the order disposing of the motion for rehearing, Fla. R. App. P. 9.020(h), a motion for rehearing does not suspend rendition of a non-final order because rehearing is not authorized for non-final orders. See Wegner v. Schillinger, 921 So.2d 854, 855 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). The status report order entered by the trial court was not a final order ending the reunification proceedings; the order provided in part that there would be no further efforts to have Itzhak spend time with the children “until further written agreement of both parents and the GAL or until further Order of the court” and predicated future contact between Itzhak and the children upon the agreement of the therapists working with the children and Itzhak.
Failing to file a notice of appeal within the time limits “constitutes an irremediable jurisdictional defect.” Hunt v. Forbes, 65 So.3d 133, 134 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). Because Itzhak failed to file the notice of appeal within thirty days of the rendition of the status report, we are required to dismiss his appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Dismissed.
MAY, C.J., TAYLOR and CONNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Miccosukee Tribe OF Indians OF Florida v. Lewis, 122 So. 3d 504 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)…to dismiss, Respondents argue the motion for reconsideration (filed July 23, 2013) was not an authorized motion because it sought reconsideration of a non-final order. See Canfield v. Cantele, [*506] 837 So. 2d 371, 376 n. 3 (Fla.2002); Bak v. Bak, 110 So. 3d 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). As a result, the motion for reconsideration neither suspended rendition of the July 15th order nor tolled the thirty-day time period for filing the instant petition. Canfield, 837 So. 2d at 376; LaCarrere v. Reilly, 987 So. 2d 8…
-
Tedder v. Est. OF Mack Reed Tedder, Sr., 200 So. 3d 123 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)…he date the notice of appeal is considered filed. Tedder filed his notice of appeal one day late, on the thirty-first day. The failure to file a notice of appeal within the time limits “constitutes an irremediable jurisdictional defect.” Bak v. Bak, 110 So. 3d 523, 524 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (quoting Hunt, 65 So. 3d at 134). Because Tedder’s notice of appeal was untimely, we lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal. APPEAL DISMISSED. BERGER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur. . Tedder is incarcerated at Union Correcti…
-
Jenkins v. State, 268 So. 3d 931 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)
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
- Wegner v. Schillinger, 921 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Hunt v. Alpheus Forbes, 65 So. 3d 133 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)