THOMAS BANNISTER AND PORTIA BANNISTER, HIS WIFE, AND BISCAYNE FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
CALVIN L. ALLEN AND PAULINE ALLEN, HIS WIFE, 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 appellate court dismissed an appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was filed outside the statutory time limit. The court noted that while the appeal lacked merit, the procedural defect precluded it from reaching the substantive issues.
No, the notice of appeal was not timely filed. The untimely petition for rehearing did not extend the time for filing the appeal.
“The court is without jurisdiction of this appeal.”
Establishes the primary reason for the court's decision.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA decree was recorded on May 9, 1960. A petition for rehearing was served and filed on May 23, 1960, which was after the allowed 10-day period. The no…
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 Appeal Period cases and more on FLexlaw
The court is without jurisdiction of this appeal. The decree appealed from was recorded May 9, 1960. A petition for rehearing was served and filed May 23, 1960, after the 10-day period allowed by rule 3.16, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 31 F.S.A. for the serving of such a petition. The notice of appeal was filed August 25, 1960, more than 60 days after the rendition of the decree. See rules 1.3 and 3.2, subd. b, Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A. Because the time for filing appeal from the final decree was not extended for the period of the pen-dency of the petition for rehearing, as the latter was not timely served, the appeal was not taken within the appealable period. Ibid rule 1.3.
However, before that jurisdictional defect was noted or called to our attention the record and briefs were examined and oral argument was heard, on consideration whereof we are of the opinion that no reversible error is shown.
For the reason stated, the appeal should be and hereby is dismissed.
It is so ordered.
HORTON, C. J., CARROLL, CHAS., J., and LOPEZ, AQUILINO, Jr., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Casto v. Casto, 404 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 1981)…icial records. See, e. g., Palladeno v. Oesterle, 345 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Becker v. King, 307 So. 2d 855 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. dismissed, 317 So. 2d 76 (Fla.1975); Borrego v. Kessler, 183 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); Bannister v. Allen, 127 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961). The respondent urges that we approve the district court’s conclusion that a new and different construction of this civil procedure term is needed because this Court changed the definition of "rendition” when it promulgated the ne…
-
Dibble v. Dibble, 377 So. 2d 1001 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…state that the time for serving a petition for rehearing runs from the date of recording, rather than filing. E. g., Palladeno v. Oesterle, 345 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Borrego v. Kessler, 183 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); Bannister v. Allen, 127 So. 2d 907 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961).1 Perhaps paradoxically, we think that these cases support, rather than conflict with, our decision. This is so because each of them was decided when the “old” definition of “rendition” was in effect. They are thus fully consisten…
-
Silly W. Pitts v. State, 225 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)…ounds in the discretion of the court at any time before the motion is determined.” . Kippy Corporation v. Colburn, (Fla. 1965) 177 So. 2d 193, 196, 197. See also Kirby v. Speight, (Fla.App.1969) 217 So. 2d 871. . Bannister v. Allen, (Fla.App.1961) 127 So. 2d 907; See also Ramagli Realty Co. v. Craver, (Fla.1960) 121 So. 2d 648. . State ex rel. Diamond Berk Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Carroll, (Fla.1958) 102 So. 2d 129.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence