S/G Construction, Inc. v. Board of Trustees

District Court of Appeal of Florida

S/G Construction, Inc. v. Board of Trustees

857 So. 2d 373, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 16110, 2003 WL 22432809

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 28, 2003

DocketNo. 1D03-2659

StatusPublished

This text of 857 So. 2d 373 (S/G Construction, Inc. v. Board of Trustees) 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

S/G Construction, Inc. v. Board of Trustees, 857 So. 2d 373, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 16110, 2003 WL 22432809 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction and for lack of standing. The appellant’s notice of appeal, filed June 19, 2003, was not timely as to the Final Judgment, entered on February 14, 2003. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.530(b); Fla R.App. P. [374]*3749.020(h). Further, the March 7, 2003 Amended Final Judgment did not extend the time to file a notice of appeal challenging the issues resolved by the Final Judgment. See St. Moritz Hotel v. Daughtry, 249 So.2d 27, 29 n. 1 (Fla.1971); Beal Bank, S.S.B. Inc. v. Sherwin, 829 So.2d 961 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); First Continental Corp. v. Khan, 605 So.2d 126 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). Finally, the appellant is not adversely affected by the Amended Final Judgment and therefore lacks standing to appeal that judgment. See Consolidated City of Jacksonville v. Buffkin, 768 So.2d 1253 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). The cross-appeal is hereby dismissed as untimely.

ERVIN, ALLEN and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction and for lack of standing. The appellant’s notice of appeal, filed June 19, 2003, was not timely as to the Final Judgment, entered on February 14, 2003. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.530(b); Fla R.App. P. [374]*3749.020(h). Further, the March 7, 2003 Amended Final Judgment did not extend the time to file a notice of appeal challenging the issues resolved by the Final Judgment. See St. Moritz Hotel v. Daughtry, 249 So.2d 27, 29 n. 1 (Fla.1971); Beal Bank, S.S.B. Inc. v. Sherwin, 829 So.2d 961 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); First Continental Corp. v. Khan, 605 So.2d 126 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). Finally, the appellant is not adversely affected by the Amended Final Judgment and therefore lacks standing to appeal that judgment. See Consolidated City of Jacksonville v. Buffkin, 768 So.2d 1253 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). The cross-appeal is hereby dismissed as untimely.

ERVIN, ALLEN and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

857 So. 2d 373, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 16110, 2003 WL 22432809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sg-construction-inc-v-board-of-trustees-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack