TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Fineman v. Greenberg

Fineman v. Greenberg, 575 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
February 12, 1991
Docket
No. 90-606
Judges
Hubbart, Baskin and Levy
Citations
575 So. 2d 13101991 WL 15575

Opinion

575 So.2d 1310 (1991)

Susan Lynn FINEMAN, Individually and As Trustee under the Hortense Grossman Testamentary Trust, Susan Lynn Fineman, Linda Ellen Schwartz and Bruce Hartley Grossman, As Beneficiaries under the Hortense Grossman Testamentary Trust, Appellants,

v.

Martin F. GREENBERG, Herbert Bernstein, Stanley H. Kuperstein and Karl M. Sacks, As the Majority in Interest of the General Partners and for the Use and Benefit of Kismet Apartments, Ltd., a Florida Limited Partnership, Appellees.

No. 90-606.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

February 12, 1991.

*1311 Weissman & Greenblatt, and Harold Weissman, Lauderhill, for appellants.

Roger A. Bridges, Coral Gables, for appellees.

Before HUBBART, BASKIN and LEVY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The defendants Susan Lynn Fineman, et al., appeal from a nonfinal order of the trial court which denied their motion to dismiss the complaint filed below. We vacate our prior order dated April 16, 1990, and dismiss the appeal filed herein upon a holding that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from an order denying a motion to dismiss a complaint. Art. V, § 4(b)(1), Fla. Const.; Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(a).

The fact that (1) the defendants filed a joint motion below to dismiss the subject complaint and to vacate a temporary injunction previously issued by the trial court, and (2) the trial court heard argument on this joint motion below cannot, as urged, convert the order appealed from into an appealable interlocutory order denying a motion for a temporary injunction under Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(a)(3)(B). This is so because the trial court did not, in the order appealed from, rule on the defendants' motion to vacate the subject temporary injunction; if and when the trial court so rules on that motion, a timely interlocutory appeal from said ruling will lie to this court. Art. V, § 4(b)(1), Fla. Const.; Fla.R. App.P. 9.130(a)(3)(B).

Appeal dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1992: 21993: 11996: 12001: 12018: 119922026peak 1992 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. CMR DISTRIBUTORS. INC. v. Resolution Trust Corp.593 So. 2d 593 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
  2. Sasser Funeral Home, Inc. v. McClellan627 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
  3. Walker v. State257 So. 3d 1175 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)
  4. Perez v. Acosta609 So. 2d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
  5. Flamingo Park Medical Center Corp. v. Marquez773 So. 2d 60 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
  6. Colominas v. City of North Miami Beach802 So. 2d 386 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Most recent

  1. Walker v. State257 So. 3d 1175 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)
  2. Colominas v. City of North Miami Beach802 So. 2d 386 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
  3. Flamingo Park Medical Center Corp. v. Marquez773 So. 2d 60 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
  4. Sasser Funeral Home, Inc. v. McClellan627 So. 2d 1304 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
  5. Perez v. Acosta609 So. 2d 51 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
  6. CMR DISTRIBUTORS. INC. v. Resolution Trust Corp.593 So. 2d 593 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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