SOUTHERN-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY AND GRANVILLE RICHARDSON
v.
LORIE MCCOY, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF LEONARD A. PALLAY, JR.
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.
Southern-Owners Insurance Company appealed a trial court's denial of its motion to enforce a settlement agreement in a wrongful death case. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that the trial court's order denying enforcement did not expressly determine as a matter of law that the settlement agreement was unenforceable or never existed.
The appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review the trial court's order. The order denying enforcement was not reviewable because the trial court did not expressly determine that, as a matter of law, the settlement agreement was unenforceable, never existed, or was set aside. Instead, the court made factual findings that the parties had not reached mutual assent.
[1] An appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review a nonfinal order denying a motion to enforce a settlement agreement if the trial court did not expressly determine, as a m…
[2] An order denying a motion to enforce a settlement agreement based on a finding of lack of mutual assent from the evidence presented at an evidentiary hearing does not con…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(ix) authorizes district courts of appeal to review nonfinal orders that determine "that, as a matter of law, a settlement agreement is unenforceable, is set aside, or never existed."”
Establishes the narrow jurisdictional basis for appellate review of settlement-related orders.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn a wrongful death case, Appellant Southern-Owners Insurance Company sought to enforce a settlement agreement. Following an evidentiary hearing, the …
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 Settlement Agreement Enforceability cases and more on FLexlaw
FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________
Case No. 5D2023-3576 LT Case No. 2021-CA-53554 _____________________________
SOUTHERN-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY and GRANVILLE RICHARDSON,
Appellants,
v.
LORIE MCCOY, as personal representative of the Estate of Leonard A. Pallay, Jr.
Appellee.
_____________________________
Nonfinal Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County. Michelle L. Naberhaus, Judge.
Carri S. Leininger and Anthony M. Stella, of Williams, Leininger & Cosby, P.A., N. Palm Beach, for Appellant, Southern-Owners Insurance Company.
Daniel P. Stiffler and Gary F. Baumann, of Baumann, Gant & Keeley, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Appellant, Granville Richardson.
Margaret E. Kozan, of Losey PLLC, Orlando, and Michael J. Damaso and Christopher N. Gonsalves, of Wooten, Kimbrough, Damaso & Dennis, P.A., Orlando, for Appellee.
May 24, 2024
LAMBERT, J.
Appellant, Southern-Owners Insurance Company, seeks review of the trial court’s nonfinal order entered in a wrongful death case denying its motion to enforce a settlement agreement after an evidentiary hearing. The court found that the evidence presented at the hearing did not establish mutual assent to the terms and conditions of the settlement offer made by Appellee. For the following reasons, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(ix) authorizes district courts of appeal to review nonfinal orders that determine “that, as a matter of law, a settlement agreement is unenforceable, is set aside, or never existed.” Simply stated, the trial court’s order in this case did not expressly determine that, as a matter of law, the purported settlement agreement was unenforceable or never existed. Under these circumstances, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction to review this order. See Powell v. Woodard, 300 So. 3d 784, 785 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (dismissing, for lack of jurisdiction, an appeal of an order denying the appellant’s motion to enforce a settlement agreement in a personal injury case following an evidentiary hearing, where the trial court did not expressly determine that, as a matter of law, a settlement agreement never existed, instead finding from the evidence that the parties had not reached a mutual assent on the material, essential terms of any purported settlement), see also Duchateau v. Duchateau, 361 So. 3d 951, 952 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023) (dismissing an appeal for lack of jurisdiction where the order denying the motion to enforce a settlement agreement entered after an evidentiary hearing did not expressly determine, as a matter of law, that the settlement agreement was unenforceable, never existed, or was set aside).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
MAKAR and JAY, JJ., concur.
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Powell v. Mildreda Woodard, 300 So. 3d 784 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)
- Duchateau v. Jeannine Duchateau, 361 So. 3d 951 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)