Bonafide Masonry v. Saxton

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bonafide Masonry v. Saxton

159 So. 3d 300, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 3142, 2015 WL 928469

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 5, 2015

DocketNo. 1D14-4833

StatusPublished

This text of 159 So. 3d 300 (Bonafide Masonry v. Saxton) 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

Bonafide Masonry v. Saxton, 159 So. 3d 300, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 3142, 2015 WL 928469 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We dismiss this appeal of two nonfinal orders rendered by the Judge of Compensation Claims on September 3, 2014, and September 23, 2014, respectively. Appellants challenge the nonfinal orders under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.180(b)(1)(A), which provides for appellate review of a nonfinal order adjudicating jurisdiction. Appellants, however, have failed to demonstrate that the September 23, 2014, order denying its motion to dismiss “adjudicates” jurisdiction, as the term is used in Rule 9.180(b)(1)(A). In the order, the JCC specifically declined to rule on the jurisdictional question raised in Appellants’ motion, based on a lack of evidence. The JCC advised Appellants to file an evidentiary motion supporting its allegations, and rather than doing so, Appellants filed this premature appeal. Appellant also failed to file a timely notice of appeal from the rendition of the September 3, 2014, order. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

LEWIS, C.J., BENTON and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We dismiss this appeal of two nonfinal orders rendered by the Judge of Compensation Claims on September 3, 2014, and September 23, 2014, respectively. Appellants challenge the nonfinal orders under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.180(b)(1)(A), which provides for appellate review of a nonfinal order adjudicating jurisdiction. Appellants, however, have failed to demonstrate that the September 23, 2014, order denying its motion to dismiss “adjudicates” jurisdiction, as the term is used in Rule 9.180(b)(1)(A). In the order, the JCC specifically declined to rule on the jurisdictional question raised in Appellants’ motion, based on a lack of evidence. The JCC advised Appellants to file an evidentiary motion supporting its allegations, and rather than doing so, Appellants filed this premature appeal. Appellant also failed to file a timely notice of appeal from the rendition of the September 3, 2014, order. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

LEWIS, C.J., BENTON and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 So. 3d 300, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 3142, 2015 WL 928469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bonafide-masonry-v-saxton-fladistctapp-2015.