Colin v. State, Department of Transportation

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Colin v. State, Department of Transportation

423 So. 2d 1020, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22206

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 29, 1982

DocketNo. 82-313

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 423 So. 2d 1020 (Colin v. State, Department of Transportation) 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

Colin v. State, Department of Transportation, 423 So. 2d 1020, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22206 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

HERSEY, Judge.

The instant appeal is brought from an order dismissing plaintiff/appellant’s complaint on the basis of improper venue. The order, on its face, is a non-final order concerning venue and subject to interlocutory appeal pursuant to Rule 9.130(a)(3)(A), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Since it is a non-final order, plaintiff’s petition for rehearing, although timely, was not authorized and therefore did not operate to toll the thirty day period for filing a notice of appeal. Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g) and Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.530. For a conflicting view see Grice v. Board of County Commissioners of Madison County, 400 So.2d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

Plaintiff expresses concern that the dismissal is, in effect, with prejudice because the statute of limitations expired after the original complaint was filed. However, plaintiff’s subsequent complaint filed in Leon County (the proper venue) should be treated as an amended complaint (amended to reflect the correct venue) for application of the statute of limitations. Thus, the date of the second complaint would relate back to that of the original complaint so that the cause of action would not be barred by the statute of limitations. Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.190(c).

Because the notice of appeal was filed more than thirty days after rendition of the order at issue, the appeal is dismissed as being untimely.

BERANEK and DELL, JJ., concur.

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

HERSEY, Judge.

The instant appeal is brought from an order dismissing plaintiff/appellant’s complaint on the basis of improper venue. The order, on its face, is a non-final order concerning venue and subject to interlocutory appeal pursuant to Rule 9.130(a)(3)(A), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Since it is a non-final order, plaintiff’s petition for rehearing, although timely, was not authorized and therefore did not operate to toll the thirty day period for filing a notice of appeal. Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g) and Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.530. For a conflicting view see Grice v. Board of County Commissioners of Madison County, 400 So.2d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).

Plaintiff expresses concern that the dismissal is, in effect, with prejudice because the statute of limitations expired after the original complaint was filed. However, plaintiff’s subsequent complaint filed in Leon County (the proper venue) should be treated as an amended complaint (amended to reflect the correct venue) for application of the statute of limitations. Thus, the date of the second complaint would relate back to that of the original complaint so that the cause of action would not be barred by the statute of limitations. Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.190(c).

Because the notice of appeal was filed more than thirty days after rendition of the order at issue, the appeal is dismissed as being untimely.

BERANEK and DELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

423 So. 2d 1020, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 22206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colin-v-state-department-of-transportation-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack