Stidhum v. McDonough
925 So. 2d 391, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 4390, 2006 WL 778670
Opinion
Upon consideration of the appellee’s motion to dismiss, as well as the appellant’s response thereto, the Court has determined that the lower tribunal’s October 5, 2005, order is not an appealable order. See Banks v. State, 916 So.2d 35 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). Accordingly, the appellee’s motion to dismiss is granted and the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. In light of the dismissal, the appellant’s Motion to Substitute Initial Brief, filed on February 6, 2006, is hereby denied as moot.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Stidhum v. McDonough, 925 So. 2d 391, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 4390, 2006 WL 778670 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).
925 So. 2d 391 (Stidhum v. McDonough) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Banks v. State
916 So. 2d 35 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)