Simonetta v. Moore

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Simonetta v. Moore

730 So. 2d 733, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 2398, 1999 WL 105244

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 3, 1999

DocketNo. 98-4820

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 730 So. 2d 733 (Simonetta v. Moore) 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

Simonetta v. Moore, 730 So. 2d 733, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 2398, 1999 WL 105244 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s notice of appeal, whereby he sought review of an order of the circuit court denying his petition for writ of mandamus, was not timely filed. For this reason, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Because the proceeding below was not a criminal case, Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(j) does not apply. However, we acknowledge appellant’s claim that he did not [734]*734receive a copy of the circuit court’s order until after the time for initiating an appeal had expired. Accordingly, this disposition is without prejudice to appellants’s right to seek relief in the trial court by motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540, requesting that the original order be set aside and that a new order be entered, such that the right to seek review may be preserved. See Brown v. State, 708 So.2d 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Snelson v. Snelson, 440 So.2d 477 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

WOLF, KAHN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s notice of appeal, whereby he sought review of an order of the circuit court denying his petition for writ of mandamus, was not timely filed. For this reason, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Because the proceeding below was not a criminal case, Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(j) does not apply. However, we acknowledge appellant’s claim that he did not [734]*734receive a copy of the circuit court’s order until after the time for initiating an appeal had expired. Accordingly, this disposition is without prejudice to appellants’s right to seek relief in the trial court by motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540, requesting that the original order be set aside and that a new order be entered, such that the right to seek review may be preserved. See Brown v. State, 708 So.2d 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Snelson v. Snelson, 440 So.2d 477 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

WOLF, KAHN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

730 So. 2d 733, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 2398, 1999 WL 105244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simonetta-v-moore-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack