STANLEY I. MEADOWS ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
JAMES L. WARD, SR., ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 2d DCA | 1975-01-17
No. 74-1151
McNULTY, C. J., and HOBSON and SCHEB, JJ., concur.
306 So. 2d 179 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1975) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Topics
Interlocutory Appeal Jurisdiction

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Interlocutory Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants seek an interlocutory appeal from a dismissal with prejudice of their cross-claim against appellees who were co-defendants with appellants in a suit brought by another for a real estate commission.

Plaintiff’s cause of action, the cross-claim and all defenses raised involve the same transaction; and the essence of all of them sounds at law. Additionally, the factual issues inherent in the transaction remain viable and all parties are still in the law suit.

In view whereof the order appealed from, being one at law and not relating to a separate transaction or a third-party defendant no longer in the action, is an interlocutory order not amenable to appeal pursuant to Rule 4.2, F.A.R.1

Accordingly, we are without jurisdiction and are compelled, ex mero motUj to dismiss the appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

McNULTY, C. J., and HOBSON and SCHEB, JJ., concur. . See S.L.T. Warehouse Company v. Webb (Fla.1974), 304 So. 2d 97.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Nuby Shealy v. Clark Constr. Co. OF Ocala, Inc., 323 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
    …that the appealed matter cannot be regarded as a distinct, and severable cause of action the disposition of which is appealable. This plenary appeal is therefore inappropriate. S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1974); Meadows v. Ward, 306 So. 2d 179 (Fla.App. 2nd, 1975). The order appealed from is one “granting partial summary judgment on liability.” It is therefore reviewable by interlocutory appeal pursuant to Rule 4.2, F. A.R. Compare DeWitt v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co., 268 So. 2d 177 (…
  • Alligood v. Se. First Nat'l Beach Bank, 338 So. 2d 1319 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)
    …relief sought, [is] such as formerly [was] cognizable in equity.” Rule 4.2a, F.A.R. The toll in delay and displacement of the trial court’s adjudicatory power is too great. Cf. S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1974); Meadows v. Ward, 306 So. 2d 179 (Fla. App.2d, 1975). The motion will be granted and the interlocutory appeal DISMISSED. McCORD, Acting C. J., and MILLS, J., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw