Viker v. Cherry
This text of 226 So. 3d 1082 (Viker v. Cherry) 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
The Court has determined that the May 5, 2017, order partially ruling on a petition to modify parenting schedule and child support is not a final order. See Hoffman v. O’Connor, 802 So.2d 1197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Furthermore, although the order was subject to immediate appellate review pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)b., appellant failed to invoke the Court’s jurisdiction to review the order in a timely manner. Ward v. Bragg, 957 So.2d 670 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (holding that rehearing of a non-final order is not authorized and does not delay rendition). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
226 So. 3d 1082, 2017 WL 4766895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/viker-v-cherry-fladistctapp-2017.