Laudramation Corp. v. Uniforms for Industry, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Laudramation Corp. v. Uniforms for Industry, Inc.

276 So. 2d 535, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 6965

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 24, 1973·No. No. 72-1465·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an interlocutory order. The Supreme Court of Florida has held: “Our rules as currently amended do not permit motions for rehearing directed to interlocutory orders. . . . ” Wagner v. Bieley, Wagner & Associates, Inc., Fla. 1972, 263 So.2d 1, 4. Therefore, as the Wagner case held that an improperly filed petition for rehearing does not operate to toll the time for filing an interlocutory appeal, and the instant appeal was filed 36 days after the rendition of the trial court’s emergency restraining order, we find that we have no jurisdiction and the appeal must be dismissed.

It is so ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an interlocutory order. The Supreme Court of Florida has held: “Our rules as currently amended do not permit motions for rehearing directed to interlocutory orders. . . . ” Wagner v. Bieley, Wagner & Associates, Inc., Fla. 1972, 263 So.2d 1, 4. Therefore, as the Wagner case held that an improperly filed petition for rehearing does not operate to toll the time for filing an interlocutory appeal, and the instant appeal was filed 36 days after the rendition of the trial court’s emergency restraining order, we find that we have no jurisdiction and the appeal must be dismissed.

It is so ordered.

Laudramation Corp. v. Uniforms for Industry, Inc., 276 So. 2d 535, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 6965 (Fla. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

276 So. 2d 535 (Laudramation Corp. v. Uniforms for Industry, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related