Mark G. Keegan v. Tracey C. Neff

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: May 29, 2024
• Docket: 2023-2621
• Status: Published

Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

MARK G. KEEGAN, Appellant,

v.

TRACEY NEFF, Appellee.

No. 4D2023-2621

[May 29, 2024]

Appeal of a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; G. Joseph Curley Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No. 502022CA002420.

Mark G. Keegan of Keegan Law Group, Palm Beach, pro se.

Brett L. Goldblatt of Goldblatt Law, PLLC, Boca Raton, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the circuit court’s post-judgment order denying appellant’s objection and motion to vacate a judicial sale of property in the underlying partition action.

Most of appellant’s arguments are untimely directed at the original final judgment ordering partition and sale, which appellant characterizes as a non-final order. However, the judgment constituted a final order. See Perez v. Jaimot, 326 So. 3d 748, 749 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (“[A]n order of partition is final at such time as the court directs the sale of the property.”). The order was final even though the court retained jurisdiction to divide the proceeds. See Morrison v. Smolarick, 334 So. 3d 675, 676 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) (“A partition order directing the sale of property is final even when the court retains jurisdiction for the purpose of adjusting, by a further decree, the accounts between the parties.”) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Therefore, appellant cannot challenge the final judgment ordering partition.

Appellant’s remaining arguments also lack merit without further discussion. Affirmed.

WARNER, GERBER and FORST, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.