Arline v. Wometco Enterprises, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Arline v. Wometco Enterprises, Inc.

429 So. 2d 63, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20792

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 5, 1983·No. No. 82-824·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The order under review, which merely grants a motion for summary judgment, is non-appealable. The appeal is therefore dismissed. Having considered the merits, however, we observe by way of dictum, as we did in Kessler v. Gumenick, 358 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), that a final summary judgment would have been affirmed. Hilgenhurst v. Knight-Ridder Newspaper, Inc., 400 So.2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), rev. denied, 411 So.2d 382 (Fla.1981); Alvarez v. Metropolitan Dade County, 378 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Wometco Theatres Corp. v. Rath, 123 So.2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); Zamora v. Columbia Broadcasting System, 480 F.Supp. 199 (S.D.Fla.1979).

Appeal dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The order under review, which merely grants a motion for summary judgment, is non-appealable. The appeal is therefore dismissed. Having considered the merits, however, we observe by way of dictum, as we did in Kessler v. Gumenick, 358 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), that a final summary judgment would have been affirmed. Hilgenhurst v. Knight-Ridder Newspaper, Inc., 400 So.2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), rev. denied, 411 So.2d 382 (Fla.1981); Alvarez v. Metropolitan Dade County, 378 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Wometco Theatres Corp. v. Rath, 123 So.2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); Zamora v. Columbia Broadcasting System, 480 F.Supp. 199 (S.D.Fla.1979).

Appeal dismissed.

Arline v. Wometco Enterprises, Inc., 429 So. 2d 63, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20792 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

429 So. 2d 63 (Arline v. Wometco Enterprises, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related