THE DRUMMOND BLOW TITLE CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
LADISLAUS BLATNICK, ALEXANDER BLATNICK AND GISELA BLATNICK, HIS WIFE, INDIVIDUALLY, 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.
A single appeal may be taken from two judgments entered in the same cause.
Appellees moved to dismiss an appeal, arguing that a single appeal could not be taken from two judgments entered in the same case. The first judgment …
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 Writ Of Error cases and more on FLexlaw
A motion by appellees to dismiss the appeal presents the question of whether a single appeal may be taken from two judgments entered in a cause. We hold that it may, and deny the motion to dismiss on authority of North American Company v. Landahl, Fla.App.1958, 107 So.2d 749.
Appellees cited Orange Belt Packing Co. v. International Agr. Corp., (1933) 112 Fla. 99, 150 So. 264, in which the Supreme Court said: “It is well settled that separate causes cannot, as a general rule, be brought up by a single writ of error,” and Borland v. South Patrick Utility Corp., Fla.App.1960, 122 So.2d 44, where it was held that separate notices of appeal were necessary to appeal two judgments rendered in separate cases, even though such causes had been consolidated for trial for convenience. Those authorities are not applicable and controlling here. In this instance only one case was involved and the two judgments *712were entered in the same case. The first judgment was a money judgment for the plaintiff. The second judgment was an amended judgment which repeated the first judgment and added thereto.
This case presents a question of doubt as to whether there are two judgments or only one, since the second, styled “Amended Final Judgment” incorporated the first judgment. Assuming, without so deciding, that both were appealable, it was proper to include the two judgments in a single notice of appeal since they were entered in the one case in the trial court. North American Company v. Landahl, supra. Cf. Stewart v. Codrington, 55 Fla. 237, 45 So. 809, 813.
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Preston v. Grant Advertising, Inc., 166 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)…the corrected final judgment entered on petition for rehearing. It has been heretofore determined if there are two final judgments in the same action they may be appealed in one notice of appeal. Drummond Blow Title Corp. v. Blatnick, Fla.App.1958, 157 So. 2d 711. But this is not such a case. The only effective final judgment is the second judgment which dismissed the complaint without prejudice to pursue other remedies available to the plaintiff. Therefore, the mention of the first judgment was sur-plusage.…
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Russel Reichard & Marjorie Reichard v. The Honorable Sherman N. Smith, Jr., 177 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1965)…eption. In this case the plaintiffs filed only one complaint with two counts. There was no consolidation for any purpose since none was necessary. Under these facts, the doctrine of Drummond Blow Title Corp. v. Blatnick (Fla.App. 3rd District 1963) 157 So. 2d 711, should be applied. The court there denied the applicability of Orange Belt Packing Co. and Borland, supra, saying: “Those authorities are not applicable and controlling here. In this instance only one case was involved and the two judgments were e…
-
Schor v. Indus. Supply Corp., 173 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)…ction, which vests jurisdiction in this court, in that it is an attempt by one notice of appeal to review a separate judgment and a separate decree rendered in two different causes of action. See: Drummond Blow Title Corp. v. Blatnick, Fla.App.1963, 157 So. 2d 711. However, we have examined the record on appeal and fail to find error in the judgment complained of and in the final decree. Therefore, notwithstanding the apparent jurisdictional defect, they are hereby affirmed. Affirmed. CARROLL. J.. concurs i…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Orange Belt Packing Co. v. Int'l Agric. Corp., 112 Fla. 99 (Fla. 1933)
- Borland v. S. Patrick Util. Corp., 122 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)
- N. Am. Co. v. Landahl, 107 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)