Machinery Wholesalers, Inc. v. Wolpe

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Machinery Wholesalers, Inc. v. Wolpe

700 So. 2d 170, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11605, 1997 WL 631518

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 15, 1997

DocketNo. 97-2468

StatusPublished

This text of 700 So. 2d 170 (Machinery Wholesalers, Inc. v. Wolpe) 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

Machinery Wholesalers, Inc. v. Wolpe, 700 So. 2d 170, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11605, 1997 WL 631518 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

COPE, Judge.

The law firm of Wolpe, Leibowitz & Brotman moves to dismiss the appeal filed by Machinery Wholesalers, Inc. and Mark Fields for want of an appealable order. We grant the motion.

The law firm sued the appellant former clients for unpaid fees for legal services. The former clients filed a compulsory counterclaim for legal malpractice arising from the same representation on which the law firm is seeking to recover fees. On the counterclaim for legal malpractice, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the law firm, and the former clients have appealed. The main claim remains pending below.

“The dismissal of a compulsory counterclaim with prejudice is not considered a final disposition and is, thus, not appealable until a final disposition of the original cause has been obtained on the merits.” Johnson v. Allen, Knudsen, DeBoest, Edwards & Rhodes, P.A., 621 So.2d 507, 509 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1993); see also S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So.2d 97, 100 (Fla.1974); Mermel v. Rifkin, 603 So.2d 595, 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Del Castillo v. Ralor Pharmacy, Inc., 512 So.2d 315, 320 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

The former clients contend that this court has held otherwise in the context of a compulsory counterclaim in a medical malpractice action. For this proposition they rely on Stein v. Feingold, 629 So.2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). So far as the opinion in that case indicates, the question of appealability of the order disposing of the compulsory counterclaim was neither raised nor addressed.

We dismiss the appeal for want of an appealable order. Any party is free to appeal from the final judgment entered at the conclusion of the case.

Appeal dismissed.

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

COPE, Judge.

The law firm of Wolpe, Leibowitz & Brotman moves to dismiss the appeal filed by Machinery Wholesalers, Inc. and Mark Fields for want of an appealable order. We grant the motion.

The law firm sued the appellant former clients for unpaid fees for legal services. The former clients filed a compulsory counterclaim for legal malpractice arising from the same representation on which the law firm is seeking to recover fees. On the counterclaim for legal malpractice, the trial court entered summary judgment in favor of the law firm, and the former clients have appealed. The main claim remains pending below.

“The dismissal of a compulsory counterclaim with prejudice is not considered a final disposition and is, thus, not appealable until a final disposition of the original cause has been obtained on the merits.” Johnson v. Allen, Knudsen, DeBoest, Edwards & Rhodes, P.A., 621 So.2d 507, 509 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1993); see also S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So.2d 97, 100 (Fla.1974); Mermel v. Rifkin, 603 So.2d 595, 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Del Castillo v. Ralor Pharmacy, Inc., 512 So.2d 315, 320 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

The former clients contend that this court has held otherwise in the context of a compulsory counterclaim in a medical malpractice action. For this proposition they rely on Stein v. Feingold, 629 So.2d 998 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). So far as the opinion in that case indicates, the question of appealability of the order disposing of the compulsory counterclaim was neither raised nor addressed.

We dismiss the appeal for want of an appealable order. Any party is free to appeal from the final judgment entered at the conclusion of the case.

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

700 So. 2d 170, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11605, 1997 WL 631518, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/machinery-wholesalers-inc-v-wolpe-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack