Wicke v. Sikes

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wicke v. Sikes

828 So. 2d 495, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15495, 2002 WL 31373698

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 23, 2002

DocketNo. 1D02-2633

StatusPublished

This text of 828 So. 2d 495 (Wicke v. Sikes) 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

Wicke v. Sikes, 828 So. 2d 495, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15495, 2002 WL 31373698 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Having considered the appellant’s response to this Court’s order of September 11, 2002, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The order on appeal, Order Granting Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Respondent’s Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs, dated April 29, 2002, is not a final order and the appeal was prematurely taken where this order does not in fact dispose of the case. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(m) (2002). “An order which merely grants a motion for summary judgment without more, is not an appealable final order.” McQuaig v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 789 So.2d 1215, 1215 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). The appellant s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

DISMISSED.

ERVIN, BARFIELD and WOLF, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Having considered the appellant’s response to this Court’s order of September 11, 2002, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The order on appeal, Order Granting Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment and Respondent’s Motion for Attorney Fees and Costs, dated April 29, 2002, is not a final order and the appeal was prematurely taken where this order does not in fact dispose of the case. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(m) (2002). “An order which merely grants a motion for summary judgment without more, is not an appealable final order.” McQuaig v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 789 So.2d 1215, 1215 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). The appellant s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

DISMISSED.

ERVIN, BARFIELD and WOLF, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

828 So. 2d 495, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15495, 2002 WL 31373698, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wicke-v-sikes-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack