Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Hull v. Byrom

Hull v. Byrom

75 So. 3d 427, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 19999, 2011 WL 6224493
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 15, 2011
DocketNo. 1D10-6520
StatusPublished

This text of 75 So. 3d 427 (Hull v. Byrom) 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
Hull v. Byrom, 75 So. 3d 427, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 19999, 2011 WL 6224493 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the dismissal of Byrom, P.A. as a party to the underlying surcharge action. However, we decline to reach the [428]*428issue of whether the trial court erred in striking portions of the surcharge petition as that issue was prematurely raised and is properly considered at the conclusion of all judicial labor. See Cole v. Bayley Prods., Inc., 661 So.2d 1299, 1800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (determining that an interlocutory order on motion to strike is not reviewable prior to final judgment).

AFFIRMED in part, DISMISSED in part.

WOLF, HAWKES, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cole v. BAYLEY PRODUCTS, INC.
661 So. 2d 1299 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
75 So. 3d 427, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 19999, 2011 WL 6224493, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hull-v-byrom-fladistctapp-2011.