ELL-GEE, INC. ET AL., RELATORS,
v.
HONORABLE RICHARD H. M. SWANN, AS CHIEF JUDGE ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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 judgment is not rendered for appeal purposes unless it is in writing, signed by the judge, and filed.
Relators sought a writ of prohibition to stop the District Court of Appeal from proceeding with an appeal. They argued the State's notice of appeal wa…
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 Entry Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is before us on Suggestion for Writ of Prohibition seeking to prohibit the respondents, as and constituting the District Court of Appeal, Third District, from proceeding further in the case of State of Florida v. Ell-Gee, Inc., et al, now pending in that Court.
Oral argument is dispensed with pursuant to Rule 3.10(e), Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.
Relators contend that the State’s notice of appeal was not timely because filed more than 30 days from the oral order of the Court made in open court on March 9, 1971, and noted by the Clerk on the same day in the record minute book. The Court filed its written order March 29, 1971. The State’s notice of appeal was filed April 28, 1971.
Relators rely on the case of Gossett v. State, 188 So.2d 836 (Fla.App.2d 1966), holding an unsigned minute book entry of judgment was appealable. This Court expressly declined to follow the Gossett decision in Jenkins v. Lyles, 223 So.2d 740, 742 (Fla.1969). More recently, in State ex rel. Faircloth v. Cross, 238 So.2d 81 (Fla.1970), a proceeding in prohibition to prevent the exercise of jurisdiction in a criminal appeal, we held:
“[I]t is clear that the judgment is not rendered for the purpose of an appeal unless it is rendered ‘in open court and *851in writing, signed by the judge and filed.’ as required by Rule 1.670, Cr.P.R.”
Accordingly, the Suggestion for Writ of Prohibition is denied and the cause dismissed.
It is so ordered.
ROBERTS, C. J., and CARLTON, BOYD and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
ERVIN, J., concurs in the conclusion only.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gossett v. State, 188 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Earl Faircloth v. Hon. Spencer C. Cross, 238 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 1970)
- Eli S. Jenkins v. Hon. Woody A. Lyles, 223 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 1969)