Jacobs v. Michael Titze Co.
911 So. 2d 889, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 15630, 2005 WL 2414749
Opinion
Upon consideration of the appellants’ response to the Court’s order of July 25, 2005, the Court has determined that the appeal was prematurely initiated. See generally Benton v. Moore, 655 So.2d 1272, 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). The appellants have failed to obtain a final order and to amend the notice of appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The appellants’ motion for extension of time to file the initial brief is denied as moot.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Jacobs v. Michael Titze Co., 911 So. 2d 889, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 15630, 2005 WL 2414749 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).
911 So. 2d 889 (Jacobs v. Michael Titze Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Benton v. Moore
655 So. 2d 1272 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)