In re the Estate of Zaloudek

356 So. 2d 1326, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15267
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 4, 1978·No. No. 77-1606·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

DAUKSCH, Judge.

Appellants bring for our review an order of the trial court which quashed a subpoena duces tecum. They have designated their appeal as being an interlocutory appeal and we recognize it as such. We derive our authority for interlocutory review from Fla. [1327]*1327App. Rule 4.2. In this probate matter Fla. Probate and Guardianship Rule 5.100 also defines the right of appeal. In neither rule does a party have the right to interlocutory appeal from a non-final order in a probate action. In re Estate of Baker, 327 So.2d 205 (Fla.1976); Tyler v. Huggins, 175 So.2d 239 (Fla. 2 DCA 1965); In re Estate of Leterman, 238 So.2d 695 (Fla. 3 DCA 1970); Johnson v. General Motors Corp., 350 So.2d 1119 (Fla. 4 DCA 1977).

Appeal DISMISSED.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and MOORE, J., concur.

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

In re the Estate of Zaloudek, 356 So. 2d 1326, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15267 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

356 So. 2d 1326 (In re the Estate of Zaloudek) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In Re Estate of Bierman
587 So. 2d 1163 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Howard v. Baumer
519 So. 2d 679 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)