Amis v. Harris

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Amis v. Harris

480 So. 2d 188, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 39, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16936

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 18, 1985

DocketNo. 85-1149

StatusPublished

This text of 480 So. 2d 188 (Amis v. Harris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Amis v. Harris, 480 So. 2d 188, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 39, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16936 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The instant appeal is dismissed. The appellant has sought review of the trial court’s order dismissing with prejudice five counts of an eight count amended complaint. Each of the dismissed counts is interrelated with and originates in the same factual setting giving rise to the three remaining counts which were also dismissed but with leave again to amend. Neal v. Matherson, 410 So.2d 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). The record discloses the appellant filed a second amended complaint, also challenged by a motion to dismiss, approximately one week prior to the filing of the notice of appeal. In the event the appellant appeals from a final order, the questions presented in the appeal we now dismiss may be reasserted. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(g).

RYDER, C.J., and DANAHY and FRANK, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The instant appeal is dismissed. The appellant has sought review of the trial court’s order dismissing with prejudice five counts of an eight count amended complaint. Each of the dismissed counts is interrelated with and originates in the same factual setting giving rise to the three remaining counts which were also dismissed but with leave again to amend. Neal v. Matherson, 410 So.2d 596 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). The record discloses the appellant filed a second amended complaint, also challenged by a motion to dismiss, approximately one week prior to the filing of the notice of appeal. In the event the appellant appeals from a final order, the questions presented in the appeal we now dismiss may be reasserted. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(g).

RYDER, C.J., and DANAHY and FRANK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

480 So. 2d 188, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 39, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16936, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amis-v-harris-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack