Fyvie v. First Bank of Crestview

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fyvie v. First Bank of Crestview

837 So. 2d 1162, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 2016, 2003 WL 367191

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 21, 2003

DocketNo. 1D02-4879

StatusPublished

This text of 837 So. 2d 1162 (Fyvie v. First Bank of Crestview) 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

Fyvie v. First Bank of Crestview, 837 So. 2d 1162, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 2016, 2003 WL 367191 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Having considered the appellants’ response to this Court’s order, dated January 2, 2003, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The order on appeal, Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment and Partial Summary Final Judgment, rendered on October 12, 2002, dismisses claims for wrongful eviction, wrongful conversion, and damages which arose out of the samé operative facts surrounding the foreclosure action and contract that are at issue in the remaining pending claim of breach of contract. Because the order does not resolve a distinct and severable cause of action and judicial labor remains on an interrelated claim involving the same transaction and parties, the appeal is premature. See S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So.2d 97, 99 (Fla.1974); Odham v. Mouat, 484 So.2d 95, 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Croteau v. Operator Service Co., 721 So.2d 386, 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(k), (m).

DISMISSED.

ERVIN, BOOTH and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Having considered the appellants’ response to this Court’s order, dated January 2, 2003, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The order on appeal, Order Granting Motion for Summary Judgment and Partial Summary Final Judgment, rendered on October 12, 2002, dismisses claims for wrongful eviction, wrongful conversion, and damages which arose out of the samé operative facts surrounding the foreclosure action and contract that are at issue in the remaining pending claim of breach of contract. Because the order does not resolve a distinct and severable cause of action and judicial labor remains on an interrelated claim involving the same transaction and parties, the appeal is premature. See S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So.2d 97, 99 (Fla.1974); Odham v. Mouat, 484 So.2d 95, 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Croteau v. Operator Service Co., 721 So.2d 386, 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(k), (m).

DISMISSED.

ERVIN, BOOTH and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

837 So. 2d 1162, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 2016, 2003 WL 367191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fyvie-v-first-bank-of-crestview-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack