Nathanson v. Keller

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Nathanson v. Keller

498 So. 2d 968, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2434, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10685

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 19, 1986

DocketNo. 4-86-0149

StatusPublished

This text of 498 So. 2d 968 (Nathanson v. Keller) 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

Nathanson v. Keller, 498 So. 2d 968, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2434, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10685 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

DOWNEY, Judge.

Appellant, Melvin E. Nathanson, sued ap-pellees, Richard Keller and Keller & Associates, P.A., in seven counts. The parties stipulated that Count II (breach of contract) and the first affirmative defense (waiver and estoppel) should be bifurcated and tried first. A non-jury trial took place, after which the trial court entered a final judgment against appellant, as plaintiff, and dismissed the entire complaint.

[969]*969After consideration of the record involving the trial of the bifurcated portion of the case, we find no reversible error demonstrated. However, all parties concede that the dismissal of the entire complaint was not proper because the remaining counts thereof have not as yet been presented.

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is affirmed with respect to Count II and the first affirmative defense, and reversed as to the remainder of the complaint, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

ANSTEAD, J., and WILLIS, BEN C„ Associate Judge (Retired), concur.

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

DOWNEY, Judge.

Appellant, Melvin E. Nathanson, sued ap-pellees, Richard Keller and Keller & Associates, P.A., in seven counts. The parties stipulated that Count II (breach of contract) and the first affirmative defense (waiver and estoppel) should be bifurcated and tried first. A non-jury trial took place, after which the trial court entered a final judgment against appellant, as plaintiff, and dismissed the entire complaint.

[969]*969After consideration of the record involving the trial of the bifurcated portion of the case, we find no reversible error demonstrated. However, all parties concede that the dismissal of the entire complaint was not proper because the remaining counts thereof have not as yet been presented.

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is affirmed with respect to Count II and the first affirmative defense, and reversed as to the remainder of the complaint, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

ANSTEAD, J., and WILLIS, BEN C„ Associate Judge (Retired), concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

498 So. 2d 968, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2434, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10685, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nathanson-v-keller-fladistctapp-1986.