Alimenta (U.S.A.), Inc. v. Pender Peanut Co.
389 So. 2d 7, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 17808
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 17, 1980·No. No. UU-145·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Sua sponte, this Court dismisses the appeal on the ground that it was untimely filed. The order appealed from is an order denying Appellant’s motion to dismiss for [8] improper venue. Such an order is interlocutory, and a motion to reconsider its entry is not authorized by Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.530(a). Thus, the filing and pendency of a motion for reconsideration does not toll the time for taking an appeal. “M ” Enterprises, Inc. v. Baumgartner, 362 So.2d 282 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Alimenta (U.S.A.), Inc. v. Pender Peanut Co., 389 So. 2d 7, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 17808 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).
389 So. 2d 7 (Alimenta (U.S.A.), Inc. v. Pender Peanut Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
City of Melbourne v. Floyd
415 So. 2d 758 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)