Pagenet, Inc. v. STATE DEPT. OF REVENUE
This text of 843 So. 2d 1027 (Pagenet, Inc. v. STATE DEPT. OF REVENUE) 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.
Opinion
PAGENET, INC. f/k/a/ Paging Network of Tennessee, Inc., Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Allen H. Libow, David R. Carls, and Eric J. Stockel, of Libow & Muskat, Boca Raton, for Appellant.
Charles Catanzaro, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Having considered the appellant's response to the Court's order of March 18, 2003, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The order on appeal, which dismissed appellant's complaint without prejudice to its right to file an amended complaint that corrects the identified defects, did not end the judicial labor effectuating a termination of the cause. See Augustin v. Blount, Inc., 573 So.2d 104 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Furthermore, the order did not become a final order by purporting to be a dismissal with prejudice if the appellant failed to comply with any of the options provided in the order for filing an amended complaint. Ponton v. Gross, 576 So.2d 910 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). The dismissal is without prejudice to appellant's right to appeal when a final order is rendered in the trial court.
The motion entitled "Appellee's Motion for Order Prohibiting Appellant from Introducing into the Record on Appeal Materials not Filed in the Lower Tribunal," filed on April 9, 2003, is denied as moot.
BOOTH, WOLF and KAHN, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
843 So. 2d 1027, 2003 WL 21002888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pagenet-inc-v-state-dept-of-revenue-fladistctapp-2003.