Johnson v. HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Johnson v. HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n

65 So. 3d 57, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8109, 2011 WL 2154408

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 2, 2011

Docket1D10-6223

StatusPublished

This text of 65 So. 3d 57 (Johnson v. HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n) 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

Johnson v. HSBC Bank USA, National Ass'n, 65 So. 3d 57, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8109, 2011 WL 2154408 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the appellants’ response to the Court’s order of January 7, 2011, as well as the attached documents, the Court has determined that this appeal is premature. On May 6, 2009, the lower tribunal granted a motion to dismiss the appellants’ counterclaims. However, because it did so without prejudice to amend, the order failed to actually dispose of the counterclaims. Augustin v. Blount, 573 So.2d 104 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (noting that the appellant’s proper course is to request entry of a final order which may be appealed); Ponton v. Gross, 576 So.2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Although a great deal of litigation has followed entry of the Order Granting Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims, including the entry of the Final Summary Judgment of Mortgage Foreclosure without mention of the counterclaims, the fact that the counterclaims remain pending, whether through oversight or by design, renders this appeal premature.

DAVIS, LEWIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the appellants’ response to the Court’s order of January 7, 2011, as well as the attached documents, the Court has determined that this appeal is premature. On May 6, 2009, the lower tribunal granted a motion to dismiss the appellants’ counterclaims. However, because it did so without prejudice to amend, the order failed to actually dispose of the counterclaims. Augustin v. Blount, 573 So.2d 104 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (noting that the appellant’s proper course is to request entry of a final order which may be appealed); Ponton v. Gross, 576 So.2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Although a great deal of litigation has followed entry of the Order Granting Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims, including the entry of the Final Summary Judgment of Mortgage Foreclosure without mention of the counterclaims, the fact that the counterclaims remain pending, whether through oversight or by design, renders this appeal premature.

DAVIS, LEWIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 So. 3d 57, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 8109, 2011 WL 2154408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-hsbc-bank-usa-national-assn-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack