AMMY M. KOGAN, APPELLANT,
v.
MICHAEL MILDENBERGER, 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.
Kogan appeals a trial court order granting Mildenberger's motion for entry of default judgment on liability only. The Third District Court of Appeal dismisses the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that orders determining liability are not immediately appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130.
The order is not appealable. Orders determining the issue of liability are not appealable under Rule 9.130 until the conclusion of the case, as the provision previously allowing such appeals was deleted effective January 1, 2001.
[1] An order granting a motion for entry of default judgment as to liability only is a non-final, non-appealable order.
[2] Appellate rules narrowly construe the scope of review for non-final orders to discourage piecemeal litigation.
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 intelligence“Rule 9.130 "is designed to reduce the number of appealable pretrial orders and to discourage piecemeal review. Given this objective, the courts have narrowly construed the scope of the rule so that it applies only to the orders it identifies as appealable orders."”
Establishes the narrow construction principle applied to Rule 9.130
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn June 15, 2012, Mildenberger filed a Motion for Entry of Default Judgment against Kogan. On June 27, 2012, the trial court granted the motion as to …
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 Interlocutory Review cases and more on FLexlaw
ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Appellee, Michael Mildenberger (“Mil-denberger”) moves to dismiss the appeal filed by Appellant, Ammy Kogan (“Ko-gan”). Mildenberger contends that the order on appeal is a non-final, non-appeal-able order and that this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. We agree.
On June 15, 2012, Mildenberger filed a Motion for Entry of Default Judgement *832against Kogan pursuant to Rule 1.500(b), Florida Rule of Civil Procedure. On June 27, 2012, the trial court entered an order granting Mildenberger’s Motion for Entry of Default Judgment against Kogan as to liability only, and Kogan appeals from this order.
Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(8) authorizes interlocutory review of a limited number of non-final orders. Rule 9.130 “is designed to reduce the number of appealable pretrial orders and to discourage piecemeal review. Given this objective, the courts have narrowly construed the scope of the rule so that it applies only to the orders it identifies as appealable orders.” Cotton States Mut. Ins. v. D’Alto, 879 So.2d 67, 69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (citations omitted). Appeals of non-final orders determining the issue of liability in favor of a party seeking affirmative relief were previously appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv). See Doctor’s Hosp. of Hollywood, Inc. v. Madison, 411 So.2d 190, 191 (Fla.1982). “However, that provision of Rule 9.130 was deleted, effective January 1, 2001, so orders determining the issue of liability now ‘are not appealable until the conclusion of the case.” ’ Fascetti v. Fascetti, 795 So.2d 1094, 1095 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (quoting Fla. R.App. P. 9.130 (Committee Notes, 2000 Amendment)). No remaining section of Rule 9.130 allows for an immediate appeal of the instant order.
Here, Kogan appeals the trial court’s entry of a Default Judgment on the issue of liability. The order at issue, however, does not bring an end to the litigation below. Because this type of order was expressly removed from the list of appeal-able non-final orders included in Rule 9.130, we grant the motion and dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Westwood One, Inc. v. Flight Express, Inc., 940 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (dismissing appeal of trial court’s non-final order granting motion for default for lack of jurisdiction).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Valledor Co., Inc. v. Zena Decky, 338 So. 3d 956 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)
-
Amparo Denis v. Seasons Gardens Senior Residence, LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
-
AGM Dev. II, LLC v. The Bank OF NEW York, 183 So. 3d 396 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Doctor's Hosp. OF Hollywood, Inc. v. Hunter W. Madison, 411 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 1982)
- Cotton States Mut. Ins. v. D'Alto, 879 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Fascetti v. Fascetti, 795 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Guinade v. State, 940 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Westwood ONE, Inc. v. Flight Express, Inc., 940 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)