Guth v. Howard
This text of 362 So. 2d 725 (Guth v. Howard) 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.
Opinion
Walter F. GUTH, Appellant,
v.
Nell F. HOWARD, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Walter S. McLin, III of McLin, Burnsed & Cyrus, Leesburg, for appellant.
William F. Brewton of Brewton, Council & Swann, Dade City, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner/appellant seeks to appeal an order which reads "that [respondent's] motion to dismiss be and the same is hereby granted." This is not a final order within the contemplation of Fla.R.App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(A). Likewise, this is not a nonfinal order which may be reviewed by an interlocutory appeal. Fla.R.App. P. 9.130(a)(3). Since we have no jurisdiction, the appeal, sua sponte, is dismissed. Arnold v. Brady, 178 So.2d 732 (Fla.2d DCA 1965); Renard v. Kirkeby Hotels, 99 So.2d 719 (Fla.3d DCA 1958).
GRIMES, C.J., and RYDER and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
362 So. 2d 725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/guth-v-howard-fladistctapp-1978.