Chrispen v. Hertz Penske Truck Leasing, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Chrispen v. Hertz Penske Truck Leasing, Inc.

478 So. 2d 120, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2527, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16751

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 13, 1985

DocketNo. 85-219

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 478 So. 2d 120 (Chrispen v. Hertz Penske Truck Leasing, Inc.) 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

Chrispen v. Hertz Penske Truck Leasing, Inc., 478 So. 2d 120, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2527, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16751 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant has filed a plenary appeal from two orders of the circuit court: 1) granting partial summary judgment eliminating several damage claims and determining the only viable claim remaining was for property damage not exceeding $865 and 2) transferring the cause to the county court.

Neither order is a final appealable order nor is either subject to appeal as a nonfinal order. However, since the partial summary judgment cannot be reviewed on plenary appeal from the final judgment in the county court, we shall treat the appeal as a petition for writ of common law certiorari. Having so considered the matter, the petition is denied.

DOWNEY, GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant has filed a plenary appeal from two orders of the circuit court: 1) granting partial summary judgment eliminating several damage claims and determining the only viable claim remaining was for property damage not exceeding $865 and 2) transferring the cause to the county court.

Neither order is a final appealable order nor is either subject to appeal as a nonfinal order. However, since the partial summary judgment cannot be reviewed on plenary appeal from the final judgment in the county court, we shall treat the appeal as a petition for writ of common law certiorari. Having so considered the matter, the petition is denied.

DOWNEY, GLICKSTEIN and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

478 So. 2d 120, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 2527, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 16751, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chrispen-v-hertz-penske-truck-leasing-inc-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack