Cohen, Scherer & Cohen, P.A. v. Pacific Employers Insurance Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Cohen, Scherer & Cohen, P.A. v. Pacific Employers Insurance Co.

654 So. 2d 282, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4617, 1995 WL 253925

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 3, 1995

DocketNo. 94-1324

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 654 So. 2d 282 (Cohen, Scherer & Cohen, P.A. v. Pacific Employers Insurance Co.) 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

Cohen, Scherer & Cohen, P.A. v. Pacific Employers Insurance Co., 654 So. 2d 282, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4617, 1995 WL 253925 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

KLEIN, Judge.

The court, sua sponte, dismisses this appeal of an order dismissing a counterclaim with prejudice but leaving the main claim pending.

Appellee/insurer settled a legal malpractice case brought against its insured, appellant/law firm, and paid the $50,000 deductible which the law firm was obligated to pay under the policy. Insurer then brought this suit against the law firm to collect the $50,-000 deductible, and the law firm counterclaimed, alleging that the insurer breached its obligations under the policy to properly defend the law firm. The trial court dismissed the counterclaim with prejudice because it failed to state a cause of action.

Since the main claim is still pending, and since the main claim and the counterclaim are interrelated in that they both arise out of the malpractice claim and the obligations of the parties under the insurance policy in regard to the malpractice claim, this appeal is premature under S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So.2d 97 (Fla.1974). See also City of Haines v. Allen, 509 So.2d 982 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (an order disposing of a compulsory counterclaim cannot be appealed until disposition of the main claim).

This appeal is therefore dismissed without prejudice to appellant’s right to appeal the dismissal of the counterclaim after final determination of the main claim.

POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

KLEIN, Judge.

The court, sua sponte, dismisses this appeal of an order dismissing a counterclaim with prejudice but leaving the main claim pending.

Appellee/insurer settled a legal malpractice case brought against its insured, appellant/law firm, and paid the $50,000 deductible which the law firm was obligated to pay under the policy. Insurer then brought this suit against the law firm to collect the $50,-000 deductible, and the law firm counterclaimed, alleging that the insurer breached its obligations under the policy to properly defend the law firm. The trial court dismissed the counterclaim with prejudice because it failed to state a cause of action.

Since the main claim is still pending, and since the main claim and the counterclaim are interrelated in that they both arise out of the malpractice claim and the obligations of the parties under the insurance policy in regard to the malpractice claim, this appeal is premature under S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So.2d 97 (Fla.1974). See also City of Haines v. Allen, 509 So.2d 982 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987) (an order disposing of a compulsory counterclaim cannot be appealed until disposition of the main claim).

This appeal is therefore dismissed without prejudice to appellant’s right to appeal the dismissal of the counterclaim after final determination of the main claim.

POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

654 So. 2d 282, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 4617, 1995 WL 253925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cohen-scherer-cohen-pa-v-pacific-employers-insurance-co-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack