JOSEPH JOHN CICERO, JR., A MINOR BY HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND JOSEPH JOHN CICERO, SR., AND JOSEPH JOHN CICERO, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
v.
ROY F. PARADIS, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A DUMP TRUCKS, AND R. V. HEMPHILL, APPELLEES
JOSEPH JOHN CICERO, JR., A MINOR BY HIS FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND JOSEPH JOHN CICERO, SR., AND JOSEPH JOHN CICERO, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
ROY F. PARADIS, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A DUMP TRUCKS, AND R. V. HEMPHILL, APPELLEES
167 So. 2d 247
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1964)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
Plaintiffs have appealed an order dismissing their complaint and cause in a negligence action. Appellees urge on their motion to dismiss the appeal that the order is non-appealable under Shotkin v. Deehl, Fla.App.1963, 148 So.2d 538; Baker v. Colley, Fla.App.1958, 104 So.2d 473; Rule 3.2 (b) Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A. This contention is without merit. The trial court not only dismissed the complaint but also dismissed the cause, and therefore the order is final and appealable. See Izquierdo v. Miramar Motors, Inc., Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 420 and cases therein cited. Appel-lees’ motions to dismiss and quash the appeal are denied.
SMITPI, C. J., and SHANNON and WHITE, JJ, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Raphael v. Carner, 194 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)…the appeal without prejudice to the right of the appellants to institute another appeal upon the entry of a final judgment in the cause. WALDEN, C. J., ANDREWS, J., and ELMORE, FRANK H., Associate Judge, concur. . Cicero v. Paradis, Fla.App.1964, 167 So. 2d 247, seems to indicate that an order must dismiss the cause, as well as the complaint, in order to be final. See also Washington Security Co. v. Tracy’s Plumbing & Pumps, Inc., Fla.App.1964, 166 So. 2d 680. Other cases indicate that a dismissal of the c…
Authorities Cited
- Baker v. Colley, 104 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- Shotkin v. Deehl, 148 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Izquierdo v. Miramar Motors, Inc., 155 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)