Kautzman v. Bandler

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kautzman v. Bandler

118 So. 2d 256, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2754

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 3, 1960

DocketNo. 59-502

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 118 So. 2d 256 (Kautzman v. Bandler) 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

Kautzman v. Bandler, 118 So. 2d 256, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2754 (Fla. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court in Dade County, transferring a negligence action to the civil court of record, upon a determination by the trial judge of lack of jurisdiction based on insufficiency of the amount involved. The order appealed from was interlocutory. The appeal was improvidently filed because interlocutory appeals in common-law actions are limited to those from orders “relating to venue or jurisdiction over the person.” Rule 4.2, subd. a, Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A.

As authorized by.§ 59.45, Fla.Stat., F.S. A., we have treated the appeal as a petition for certiorari, which is the appropriate procedure for review of such an order of transfer (Tantillo v. Miliman, Fla.1956, 87 So.2d 413), and upon consideration thereof, certiorari is denied.

It is so ordered.

HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court in Dade County, transferring a negligence action to the civil court of record, upon a determination by the trial judge of lack of jurisdiction based on insufficiency of the amount involved. The order appealed from was interlocutory. The appeal was improvidently filed because interlocutory appeals in common-law actions are limited to those from orders “relating to venue or jurisdiction over the person.” Rule 4.2, subd. a, Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A.

As authorized by.§ 59.45, Fla.Stat., F.S. A., we have treated the appeal as a petition for certiorari, which is the appropriate procedure for review of such an order of transfer (Tantillo v. Miliman, Fla.1956, 87 So.2d 413), and upon consideration thereof, certiorari is denied.

It is so ordered.

HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 So. 2d 256, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kautzman-v-bandler-fladistctapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack