Stufflebean v. Ohio Casualty Insurance
This text of 645 So. 2d 136 (Stufflebean v. Ohio Casualty Insurance) 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.
Opinion
ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Plaintiff has filed a notice of non-final appeal from an order granting defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment holding that under the doctrine of collateral estoppel, the jury verdict in another case is determinative of the negligence and comparative negligence of the parties in this case.
Plaintiff argues that this order is appeal-able because it determines “the issue of liability in favor of a party seeking affirmative relief,” and is therefore appealable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv). Defendant appellees have moved to dismiss the appeal on the ground that this order was not “in favor of a party seeking affirmative relief.” We agree.
The jury verdict in the other case found plaintiff 65% at fault in causing the accident. Plaintiff opposed the application of collateral estoppel. This order, therefore, was not in favor of plaintiff, who is the only party seeking affirmative relief in this case. We therefore dismiss the appeal.1
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
645 So. 2d 136, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11110, 1994 WL 637509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stufflebean-v-ohio-casualty-insurance-fladistctapp-1994.