BARBARA J. MANN, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES DAVIS, INTERESTED PARTY, 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 dismissed the appeal because the underlying order did not finally determine a right or obligation of an interested party and therefore was not subject to appellate review under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.170(b).
An order that does not finally determine a right or obligation of an interested party is not subject to appellate review under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.170(b).
[1] An order in a probate proceeding is not final and therefore not appealable unless it finally determines a right or obligation of an interested party, terminating judicial…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBarbara J. Mann, as personal representative, appealed an order in what appears to be an estate matter involving interested party James Davis.…
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 Probate cases and more on FLexlaw
Upon consideration of appellant’s response to the Court’s order of January 2, 2014, the Court has determined that the order on appeal does not finally determine a right or obligation of an interested party and is therefore not subject to appellate review pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.170(b). See Dempsey v. Dempsey, 899 So.2d 1272 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (concluding determination that beneficiary was entitled to share of estate was not final until specific award was defined); *831 In re Estate of Walters, 700 So.2d 434, n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (noting that in order to be reviewable, probate order must finally determine a right or obligation of an interested party, thereby terminating the judicial labor on the issue); see also Demont v. Demont, 24 So.3d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (dismissing appeal rather than allowing lower court to enter a final order where an indeterminate amount of judicial labor remained to be done before a final order could be entered).
Moreover, because the underlying order is not a final order, the motion for relief from judgment was not an authorized motion, and the order on the motion is not appealable pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(5). Bennett’s Leasing, Inc. v. First Street Mortgage Corp., 870 So.2d 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (dismissing appeal where order denied relief from interlocutory order). Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed.
LEWIS, C. J., WOLF and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Caliandro v. Bernhard Rechthaler (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)
Authorities Cited
- Bennett's Leasing, Inc. v. First St. Mortg. Corp., 870 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- Demont v. Demont, 24 So. 3d 699 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- In re Est. OF George B. Walters, Sr. v. Edwards, 700 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Dempsey v. Dempsey, 899 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)