Wrinkle v. Cooper

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wrinkle v. Cooper

859 So. 2d 629, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18072, 2003 WL 22799567

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 26, 2003·No. No. 1D03-2936·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the appellant’s responses to the Court’s orders of September 2, 2003, and September 30, 2003, the Court has determined that because the appellant was never made a party to the proceedings below, the appellant does not have standing to maintain the appeal. See Forcum v. Symmes, 101 Fla. 1266, 133 So. 88 (1931)(holding that it is a fundamental principle of appellate law that appeal jurisdiction is only available to parties); see also Stas v. Posada, 760 So.2d 954 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Accordingly, the appeal is [630] hereby dismissed. All pending motions are denied as moot.

VAN NORTWICK, PADOVANO and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the appellant’s responses to the Court’s orders of September 2, 2003, and September 30, 2003, the Court has determined that because the appellant was never made a party to the proceedings below, the appellant does not have standing to maintain the appeal. See Forcum v. Symmes, 101 Fla. 1266, 133 So. 88 (1931)(holding that it is a fundamental principle of appellate law that appeal jurisdiction is only available to parties); see also Stas v. Posada, 760 So.2d 954 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Accordingly, the appeal is [630] hereby dismissed. All pending motions are denied as moot.

VAN NORTWICK, PADOVANO and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

Wrinkle v. Cooper, 859 So. 2d 629, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 18072, 2003 WL 22799567 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

859 So. 2d 629 (Wrinkle v. Cooper) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related