TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

SOUTHERN MANAG. AND INV. CORP. v. Escandar

Southern Manag. & INV. Corp. v. Escandar, 529 So. 2d 355 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
August 9, 1988
Docket
No. 88-1558
Judges
Schwartz, C.J., and Baskin and Ferguson
Citations
529 So. 2d 3551988 WL 82520
Cited by 5

Opinion

529 So.2d 355 (1988)

SOUTHERN MANAGEMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION, a Florida Corporation, Appellant,

v.

Rafael ESCANDAR, Appellee.

No. 88-1558.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

August 9, 1988.

Freedman & Neufeld and Sanford A. Freedman, North Miami, for appellant.

Segall & Gold and Norman S. Segall, Coral Gables, for appellee.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

PER CURIAM.

Appellee seeks dismissal of an appeal from an order denying rehearing of an order granting attorney's fees and reserving jurisdiction to determine the amount to be awarded. Because the order granting fees does not decide the amount, it is not a final order, see City of Tampa v. Fein, 438 So.2d 442 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); the notice of appeal is therefore premature. See Hobbs v. Hobbs, 518 So.2d 439, 441 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) (appeal of order reserving "jurisdiction to determine the amount of the award of attorney's fees and costs to the Wife" is premature) (emphasis supplied); Fein . However, the appeal is not subject to dismissal. Fein, 438 So.2d at 443 ( citing Williams v. State, 324 So.2d 74, 79 (Fla. 1975)). Subsequent to the entry of the trial court's decision as to the amount of attorney's fees, the proceeding in this court shall continue as prescribed in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(4).

Denied and remanded.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 5 cases

View all citing references →
1989: 11990: 11994: 21996: 119892026peak 1994 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Winkelman v. Toll632 So. 2d 130 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
  2. Cokonougher v. Cokonougher543 So. 2d 460 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)
  3. Easley, McCaleb & Stallings, Ltd. v. Gibbons667 So. 2d 988 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
  4. Gonzalez Engineering, Inc. v. MIAMI PUMP AND SUPPLY CO., INC.641 So. 2d 474 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
  5. Merrill Lynch Realty, Inc. v. Bende566 So. 2d 335 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990) · Dissent

Most recent

  1. Easley, McCaleb & Stallings, Ltd. v. Gibbons667 So. 2d 988 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
  2. Gonzalez Engineering, Inc. v. MIAMI PUMP AND SUPPLY CO., INC.641 So. 2d 474 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
  3. Winkelman v. Toll632 So. 2d 130 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)
  4. Merrill Lynch Realty, Inc. v. Bende566 So. 2d 335 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990) · Dissent
  5. Cokonougher v. Cokonougher543 So. 2d 460 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
City of Tampa v. Fein, 438 So. 2d 442 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983) 13
Williams v. State, 324 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1975) 143
Hobbs v. Hobbs, 518 So. 2d 439 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988) 16

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list