OSCAR TUOZA
v.
CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION

Fla. 3d DCA | 2020-12-02
No. 20-1373
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2020) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

An appeal from a non-final order that does not constitute an end to the judicial labor in the cause must be dismissed without prejudice.


Headnotes

[1] An order is not final and appealable if it does not constitute an end to the judicial labor in the cause and further proceedings remain to be conducted by the trial court…

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“the test employed by the appellate court to determine finality of an order, judgment or decree is whether the order in question constitutes an end to the judicial labor in the cause, and nothing further remains to be done by the court to effectuate a termination of the cause as between the parties directly affected”

Court's statement of the finality standard from S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb

Facts & Procedural History

Oscar Tuoza appealed an order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County in an insurance dispute with Citizens Property Insurance Corporation.…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We grant appellee’s motion and dismiss this appeal without prejudice as one taken from a non-final, non-appealable order. See Cicco v. Luckett Tobaccos, Inc.,

934 So. 2d 560, 561 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (“We have long adhered to the rule that piecemeal appeals will not be permitted where claims are interrelated and involve the same transaction and the same parties remain in the suit.”); S.L.T. Warehouse

Co. v. Webb, 304 So. 2d 97, 99 (Fla. 1974) (“Generally, the test employed by the appellate court to determine finality of an order, judgment or decree is whether the order in question constitutes an end to the judicial labor in the cause, and nothing further remains to be done by the court to effectuate a termination of the cause as between the parties directly affected.”).

Appeal dismissed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Federico Garcia v. Milport Invs. Ltd., 334 So. 3d 734 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)
    …309 So. 3d 192, 194-95 (Fla. 2020) (adopting the federal summary judgment standard). The revised standard, effective May 1, 2021, does not apply here as the challenged orders predate the rule’s amendment. See Alvarez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 328 So. 3d 61, 63 n.3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). 6 final judgment is not “one that disposes of a separate and distinct cause of action that is not interdependent with other pleaded claims,” see Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(k), we lack appellate jurisdiction to review a…
  • …to introduce a genuine issue of material fact regarding the cause of the property damage. The trial court appeared to weigh the evidence rather than determine whether a genuine issue of material fact existed. Alvarez v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 328 So. 3d 61, 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). We conclude on de novo review of the record that 7 the trial court improperly granted summary judgment in favor of Citizens. We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith. Reversed a…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw