FLORIDA SPORTSERVICE, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF MIAMI ET AL., APPELLEES
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 an order denying equitable relief but retaining jurisdiction to award damages is not a final order and thus not appealable as such.
Plaintiff sought equitable relief under a lease contract. The trial court denied equitable relief but retained jurisdiction to award damages, transfer…
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 Supersedeas cases and more on FLexlaw
In a suit in the circuit court in Dade County, seeking certain relief in equity under a lease contract, the chancellor denied equitable relief but retained jurisdiction to determine and award damages and his order transferred the cause to the law side of the court for that purpose.
Being uncertain as to the finality of the order, the plaintiff filed the two above styled appeals, in case No. 60-126 treating the order as interlocutory, a'nd in No. 60-127 as being final.
The case is before us on a motion filed under rule 5.10, Florida Appellant Rules, 31 F.S.A. to review a subsequent order of the chancellor denying supersedeas. After hearing argument we granted the motion of the plaintiff-appellant for supersedeas, as will be evidenced by a separate order which also fixes the amount and conditions of the supersedeas bond.
It becomes necessary to determine in which of the two above styled appeals the order for supersedeas herein shall be granted. The chancellor’s denial of the relief sought in equity did not complete the judicial labor in the trial court when jurisdiction was reserved to determine and award damages, even though the cause was transferred to the law side of the court for that purpose. See Hart v. Kapnias, 157 Fla. 846, 27 So.2d 145; Hodges v. Logan, Fla.1955, 82 So.2d 885; Amatrudi v. Blake, Fla.App.1960, 117 So.2d 416.
Accordingly, appeal No. 60-127 is dismissed by this court sua sponte. The su-persedeas is granted in the interlocutory appeal No. 60-126, and further proceedings shall be in the latter appeal.
It is so ordered.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Storer v. Fla. Sportservice, Inc., 125 So. 2d 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)…ffirmed. HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur. . A previous appearance of this case is reported at 115 So. 2d 433. . This same agreement was treated by this court in Florida Sportservice, Inc. v. City of Miami, Fla.App.1960, 118 So. 2d 232. . It should be noted the minutes show that when the transaction by • which iStor-er acquired the stock of the corporation was consummated on December SI, 1956, which' included a loan from iStorer to the corporation to discharge its outstanding ind…
-
Fla. Sportservice, Inc. v. City of Miami, 125 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 1960)…Certiorari dismissed without opinion. 118 So. 2d 232; 121 So. 2d 450.…
-
Leopold D. Kingdom and Alean G. Kingdon v. Walker, 156 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)…inal”, the defendants .moved to strike plaintiffs’ assignments of error and to dismiss the appeal on that and other grounds. These motions have been carefully considered and are denied. See Florida Sportservice, Inc. v. City of Miami, Fla.App. 1960, 118 So. 2d 232; Blount v. Hansen, Fla.App.1959, 116 So. 2d 250; c/f Shannon v. Shannon, Fla.App. 1962, 136 So. 2d 253, 255, 256. The plaintiffs sought settlement of their right to conveyance of an easement pursuant to a recorded contract by which the [*210] plain…
Authorities Cited
- Hodges v. Logan, 82 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 1955)
- Hart v. Kapnias, 157 Fla. 846 (Fla. 1946)
- Amatrudi v. Blake, 117 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)