Pullins v. Garcia

170 So. 3d 80, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9049, 2015 WL 3660152
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 15, 2015·No. No. 1D14-5652·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals three orders of the trial court, each dismissing the amended complaint as to a particular defendant.

The appeals of the orders dismissing the amended complaint as against defendants Garcia and Gerjel, without prejudice and with leave to amend, are dismissed because these orders are not final orders or appealable non-final orders. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030; 9.130; McGuire v. Florida Lottery, 17 So.3d 1276 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).

The trial court’s order dismissing the amended complaint with prejudice as against defendant Taylor is affirmed. The acts complained of in the amended complaint were committed within Judge Taylor’s capacity as a trial judge while presiding over a case pending before the court, specifically, ruling against Mr. Pullins in that case. Accordingly, the trial court in this ease correctly found that judicial immunity bars the action. Fuller v. Truncale, 50 So.3d 25, 28 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010); Cunningham v. Florida Dep’t of Children & Families, 782 So.2d 913 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).

THOMAS, MARSTILLER, and BILBREY, JJ., concur.

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

Pullins v. Garcia, 170 So. 3d 80, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9049, 2015 WL 3660152 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

170 So. 3d 80 (Pullins v. Garcia) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McGuire v. FLORIDA LOTTERY
17 So. 3d 1276 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)
Fuller v. Truncale
50 So. 3d 25 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Cunningham v. Florida Department of Children & Families
782 So. 2d 913 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)