KELVONE A. WILLIAMS
v.
IRENE LOMELI, DECEASED, AND MICAELA LOMELI

Fla. 5th DCA | 2023-05-18
No. 22-2936
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2023)

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 of a nonfinal order granting intervention must be filed within 30 days, and a motion for reconsideration does not toll this jurisdictional deadline.


Headnotes

[1] The thirty-day deadline for filing a petition for writ of certiorari to review an interlocutory order granting a motion to intervene is jurisdictional, and a motion for r…

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

“A motion for rehearing directed to such an order does not toll the time for filing the notice of appeal or a certiorari petition.”

Court's explanation that post-judgment motions on nonfinal orders do not extend the deadline for appellate review.

Facts & Procedural History

Appellant Williams challenged the trial court's October 25, 2022 order granting Micaela Lomeli's motion to intervene in litigation. After the trial co…

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

LAMBERT, C.J.

In this appeal, Appellant challenges the trial court’s order granting Appellee’s motion to intervene in the litigation below. Under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040(c), we treat this appeal as a petition for certiorari review, see Gil de Lamadrid v. De Jesus Rivera, 272 So. 3d 845, 847 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (“Certiorari lies to review an interlocutory order granting a motion to intervene.” (citing Superior Fence & Rail of N. Fla. v. Lucas, 35 So. 3d 104, 105 n.1 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010); In re J.P., 12 So. 3d 253, 254 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009))); and, for the following reasons, we dismiss this proceeding for lack of jurisdiction.

The order granting intervention was rendered by the trial court on October 25, 2022. Appellant filed a motion for reconsideration or rehearing of this order, which the trial court denied. Thereafter, on November 30, 2022, Appellant filed his notice of appeal of the October 25, 2022 order. A petition for writ of certiorari must be filed within thirty days of the order being reviewed. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.100(c)(1). This thirty-day time limit is jurisdictional such that the failure to timely file the petition requires a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction. See Wibbens v. State, Dep’t of High. Saf. & Motor Veh., Bureau of Driver Impv’t, 956 So. 2d 503, 504 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (citing Hofer v. Gil De Rubio, 409 So. 2d 527, 528 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)).

The order entered here granting intervention is a nonfinal order. A motion for rehearing directed to such an order does not toll the time for filing the notice of appeal or a certiorari petition. See Deal v. Deal, 783 So. 2d 319, 321 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (citations omitted); Johnson v. Snyder, 296 So. 3d 547, 549 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020). Resultingly, Appellant’s notice of appeal was filed thirty-six days after the rendition of the order granting intervention, making it untimely.

DISMISSED.

EDWARDS and SOUD, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw