Pierce v. Pierce

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pierce v. Pierce

46 So. 3d 606, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 13322, 2010 WL 3465253

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 7, 2010·No. No. 1D10-1872·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the appellant’s response to the Court’s order of July 8, 2010, the Court has determined that the order on appeal, which denied a motion to enforce a mediated settlement agreement and set aside the agreement upon determining it was signed under duress, is not one which finally determines a right or obligation of an interested person in a [607]*607probate matter. Thus, the order is not subject to immediate review pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(a)(2). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In light of this dismissal, all pending motions are denied as moot.

DAVIS, BENTON, and CLARK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the appellant’s response to the Court’s order of July 8, 2010, the Court has determined that the order on appeal, which denied a motion to enforce a mediated settlement agreement and set aside the agreement upon determining it was signed under duress, is not one which finally determines a right or obligation of an interested person in a [607]*607probate matter. Thus, the order is not subject to immediate review pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(a)(2). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In light of this dismissal, all pending motions are denied as moot.

DAVIS, BENTON, and CLARK, JJ., concur.

Pierce v. Pierce, 46 So. 3d 606, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 13322, 2010 WL 3465253 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

46 So. 3d 606 (Pierce v. Pierce) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related