Arthur v. Smith
8 So. 3d 502, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 5771, 2009 WL 1383476
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 19, 2009·No. No. 1D09-0981·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Upon consideration of the appellants’ response to the Court’s order of March 5, 2009, the Court has determined that the December 30, 2008, order does not represent a conclusion to the judicial labor in this matter. The claims disposed of by the orders on appeal are inextricably intertwined with the counterclaims that remain pending, and the appeal is therefore premature. Cf. Mass. Life Ins. Co. v. Crapo, 918 So.2d 393 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed as premature.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Arthur v. Smith, 8 So. 3d 502, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 5771, 2009 WL 1383476 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).
8 So. 3d 502 (Arthur v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Skop v. P3 Group, L.L.C.
67 So. 3d 1194 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)