Ricardo v. Wells Fargo Bank National Ass'n

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ricardo v. Wells Fargo Bank National Ass'n

166 So. 3d 967, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9538, 2015 WL 3876388

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 24, 2015

DocketNo. 3D14-3056

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 166 So. 3d 967 (Ricardo v. Wells Fargo Bank National Ass'n) 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

Ricardo v. Wells Fargo Bank National Ass'n, 166 So. 3d 967, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9538, 2015 WL 3876388 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Roman Ricardo (“Ricardo”), appeals the trial court’s order denying rehearing of an order denying Ricardo’s motion to vacate a final judgment filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) in a foreclosure case. The Appel-lee moves to dismiss the appeal. Because an order on a motion for rehearing is not independently appealable pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.180(a)(4), we grant Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. See Christ v. Christ, 103 So.3d 1056, 1057 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“[T]he order denying rehearing is not independently reviewable.”) (citing Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(4), and Grant v. Jones, 933 So.2d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)); accord Bastida v. Vitaver, 590 So.2d 1092, 1092-93 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (dismissing appeal of order denying re-' hearing because it was “plainly a non-final order which is not appealable under Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a), as authorized by Article V, Section 4(b)(1) of the Florida Constitution.”).

Dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Roman Ricardo (“Ricardo”), appeals the trial court’s order denying rehearing of an order denying Ricardo’s motion to vacate a final judgment filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) in a foreclosure case. The Appel-lee moves to dismiss the appeal. Because an order on a motion for rehearing is not independently appealable pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.180(a)(4), we grant Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. See Christ v. Christ, 103 So.3d 1056, 1057 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (“[T]he order denying rehearing is not independently reviewable.”) (citing Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(4), and Grant v. Jones, 933 So.2d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)); accord Bastida v. Vitaver, 590 So.2d 1092, 1092-93 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (dismissing appeal of order denying re-' hearing because it was “plainly a non-final order which is not appealable under Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a), as authorized by Article V, Section 4(b)(1) of the Florida Constitution.”).

Dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 So. 3d 967, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 9538, 2015 WL 3876388, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ricardo-v-wells-fargo-bank-national-assn-fladistctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack