Schwenzer v. School of Visual Arts

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Schwenzer v. School of Visual Arts

706 So. 2d 941, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2010, 1998 WL 88296

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 4, 1998

DocketNo. 97-02176

StatusPublished

This text of 706 So. 2d 941 (Schwenzer v. School of Visual Arts) 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

Schwenzer v. School of Visual Arts, 706 So. 2d 941, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2010, 1998 WL 88296 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Maria C. Schwenzer, as personal representative of the estate of Brad Randall, deceased, appeals the final judgment which granted the School of Visual Arts’ motion for directed verdict in this wrongful death action. We affirm the final judgment with the exception of that portion of the final judgment which reserves jurisdiction to determine the amount of attorney’s fees and costs based upon an offer of judgment. The appeal of this issue must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because, until the amount of fees is awarded, that portion of the order is a non-appealable nonfinal order. See Scullin v. City of Pensacola, 667 So.2d 215 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

We dismiss the appeal to the extent that the order reserves the trial court’s jurisdiction on attorney’s fees and costs. The final judgment, however, is affirmed in all other respects.

Dismissed in part; affirmed in part.

PARKER, C.J., and FRANK and THREADGILL, JJ., concur. .

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

PER CURIAM.

Maria C. Schwenzer, as personal representative of the estate of Brad Randall, deceased, appeals the final judgment which granted the School of Visual Arts’ motion for directed verdict in this wrongful death action. We affirm the final judgment with the exception of that portion of the final judgment which reserves jurisdiction to determine the amount of attorney’s fees and costs based upon an offer of judgment. The appeal of this issue must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because, until the amount of fees is awarded, that portion of the order is a non-appealable nonfinal order. See Scullin v. City of Pensacola, 667 So.2d 215 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

We dismiss the appeal to the extent that the order reserves the trial court’s jurisdiction on attorney’s fees and costs. The final judgment, however, is affirmed in all other respects.

Dismissed in part; affirmed in part.

PARKER, C.J., and FRANK and THREADGILL, JJ., concur. .

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

706 So. 2d 941, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2010, 1998 WL 88296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schwenzer-v-school-of-visual-arts-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack