LESLIE FORRO, APPELLANT,
v.
FIVE SKY, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, D/B/A FIVE O'CLOCK CLUB, APPELLEE
Appeal dismissed.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
On Petition for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
This court, by order dated September 3, 1959, dismissed the appeal in this cause upon the appellee’s motion. The appellant’s petition for rehearing points out that the appellee’s motion to dismiss failed to specify the particular ground upon which the ap-pellee’s motion was based. In order to clarify this court’s order of September 3, 1959, and the basis for the dismissal of this appeal, suffice it to say that the record before the court indicated that the appellant had failed to file his assignments of error within the time required by Florida Appellate Rules, rule 3.5(a), 31 F.S.A.
Accordingly, the petition for rehearing is denied.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
On Petition for Rehearing.
PER CURIAM.
This court, by order dated September 3, 1959, dismissed the appeal in this cause upon the appellee’s motion. The appellant’s petition for rehearing points out that the appellee’s motion to dismiss failed to specify the particular ground upon which the appellee’s motion was based. In order to clarify this court’s order of September 3, 1959, and the basis for the dismissal of this appeal, suffice it to say that the record before the court indicated that the appellant had failed to file his assignments of error within the time required by Florida Appellate Rules, rule 3.5(a), 31 F.S.A. Accordingly, the petition for rehearing is denied.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Behring Corp. v. Walker, 42 Fla. Supp. 110 (Broward Cty. Cir. Ct. 1975)…e time called for by Florida Appellate Rule 3.5a constitutes a basis for dismissal of the appeal. See Quality Furniture House, Inc. v. General Bond and Discount Company, 97 So. 2d 203 (3rd D.C.A. Fla. 1957), and cases cited; Forro v. Five Sky, Inc., 114 So. 2d 512 (3rd D.C.A. Fla. 1959.). However, if a motion to extend is timely filed — that is, within the ten-day period — then the time period is suspended until such motion is ruled on by the court. Coggan v. Coggan, 161 So. 2d 550 (2nd D.C.A. Fla. 1964). If…