Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Lone Star Industries, Inc.

556 So. 2d 1122, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2307, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5328, 1989 WL 114476
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 3, 1989·No. No. 89-1278·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinions

[1123] ON MOTION TO DISMISS

PER CURIAM.

An order resolving a coverage issue between insured and insurer is not appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv) because such an issue does not resolve liability in favor of a party seeking affirmative relief and because the purpose of the rule is to restrict interlocutory appeals in order to curb piecemeal litigation. Travelers Ins. Co. v. Bruns, 443 So.2d 959 (Fla.1984); see also Logozzo v. Kent Ins. Co., 464 So.2d 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). Furthermore, “the theory underlying the more restrictive rule is that appellate review of non-final judgments serves to waste court resources and needlessly delays final judgment.” Bruns, 443 So.2d at 961.

Motion to dismiss granted.

NESBITT and BASKIN, JJ., concur.

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

Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Lone Star Industries, Inc., 556 So. 2d 1122, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2307, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5328, 1989 WL 114476 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

556 So. 2d 1122 (Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Lone Star Industries, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Miami-Dade County v. Aviation Office of America
826 So. 2d 1009 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Interamerican Car Rental, Inc. v. O'Brien
618 So. 2d 760 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Safe Harbor Enterprises, Inc.
634 So. 2d 169 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)