Goudy v. Gill Hotel Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Goudy v. Gill Hotel Co.

457 So. 2d 1158, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2267, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15662

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 31, 1984

DocketNo. 84-1317

StatusPublished

This text of 457 So. 2d 1158 (Goudy v. Gill Hotel 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

Goudy v. Gill Hotel Co., 457 So. 2d 1158, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2267, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15662 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

PER CURIAM.

We grant appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, but write this opinion to explain to appellant, who is pro se, why we do so.

Appellant had filed suit against the hotel in Broward County circuit court, and had amended it once. The trial judge dismissed it again, but without prejudice to another amendment. Instead of amending the complaint, appellant merely filed a new complaint consisting of exactly the same allegations. The second judge, after being made aware that appellant’s complaint was pending before another judge, dismissed the second complaint with prejudice. This appeal was brought from the second judge’s dismissal.

The trial judge has jurisdiction over the case until a final order has been entered in it. Epley v. Washington County, 358 So.2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). An order dismissing without prejudice is not a final order that would remove the original judge’s jurisdiction. E.g., New River Yachting Center v. Bacchiocchi, 407 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). It would have been proper for appellant to amend his original complaint again, as the original trial judge permitted.

HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and BARRETT, JJ., concur.

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

ON MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

PER CURIAM.

We grant appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal, but write this opinion to explain to appellant, who is pro se, why we do so.

Appellant had filed suit against the hotel in Broward County circuit court, and had amended it once. The trial judge dismissed it again, but without prejudice to another amendment. Instead of amending the complaint, appellant merely filed a new complaint consisting of exactly the same allegations. The second judge, after being made aware that appellant’s complaint was pending before another judge, dismissed the second complaint with prejudice. This appeal was brought from the second judge’s dismissal.

The trial judge has jurisdiction over the case until a final order has been entered in it. Epley v. Washington County, 358 So.2d 592 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). An order dismissing without prejudice is not a final order that would remove the original judge’s jurisdiction. E.g., New River Yachting Center v. Bacchiocchi, 407 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). It would have been proper for appellant to amend his original complaint again, as the original trial judge permitted.

HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and BARRETT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

457 So. 2d 1158, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2267, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15662, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goudy-v-gill-hotel-co-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack