Midstate Hauling Company v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

189 So. 2d 826, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4812
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 9, 1966
Docket741
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 189 So. 2d 826 (Midstate Hauling Company v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company) 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
Midstate Hauling Company v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 189 So. 2d 826, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4812 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Opinion

189 So.2d 826 (1966)

MIDSTATE HAULING COMPANY, Inc., Appellant,
v.
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellee.

No. 741.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

September 9, 1966.

Paul A. Saad and Daniel R. Walbolt, of Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler, Tampa, for appellant.

Howard J. Clifton, Orlando, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Midstate Hauling Company attempts to appeal an interlocutory order at common law dismissing its counterclaim and striking certain of its defenses.

Florida Appellate Rule 4.2, 31 F.S.A., provides for interlocutory appeals in common law proceedings only upon matters affecting venue or jurisdiction as authorized by Article V, Section 5(3), of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A. The issues of venue or jurisdiction are not raised; therefore, the appeal is clearly not an interlocutory appeal.

We then consider the finality of the order appealed to determine if the matter may be considered as a full appeal under F.A.R. 3.2. It has been held that the dismissal of a complaint, although final in form, which left pending a counterclaim was not appealable. Bumby & Stimpson, Inc. v. Peninsular Utilities Corporation, Fla.App. 1965, 179 So.2d 414. The same reasoning would apply to an order dismissing a counterclaim.

*827 Accordingly, the appeal not being interlocutory and the court not having completed its judicial labors in the cause of action between the parties, such is not an appeal from a final judgment and the cause must be dismissed. The matters determined by said order can properly be raised on an appeal from a final judgment.

Dismissed sua sponte.

ANDREWS, Acting C.J., WALDEN, J., and GONZALEZ, JOSE A., Jr., Associate Judge, concur.

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

Related

Harvey v. Huddle
416 So. 2d 1248 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Ryder Truck Lines, Inc. v. Pough
392 So. 2d 590 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
SLT Warehouse Company v. Webb
304 So. 2d 97 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1974)
Taussig v. Ins. Co. of North America
301 So. 2d 21 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
S. L. T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb
294 So. 2d 712 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1974)
Lucas v. Page
510 P.2d 868 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1973)
MIDWAY SHOP. MALL, INC. v. Airtech Air Con., Inc.
253 So. 2d 900 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1971)
Potts v. Hayden
249 So. 2d 726 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1971)
Merritt v. Unkefer
215 So. 2d 104 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
Insurance Co. of St. Louis v. Lounsbury
199 So. 2d 730 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
189 So. 2d 826, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/midstate-hauling-company-v-liberty-mutual-insurance-company-fladistctapp-1966.