From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Florida Power Light Co. v. Hogue

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Oct 7, 1983
438 So. 2d 975 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Opinion

No. 82-1537.

October 7, 1983.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Palm Beach County, Timothy P. Poulton, J.

Marjorie Gadarian Graham of Jones Foster, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Thomas A. Hoadley of Law Offices of Hoadley Gavigan, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee.


Florida Power Light Company attempts to appeal a non-final order which finds that they are liable to Hogue for insurance coverage. The company asserts that this court has jurisdiction to review such an order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv) and Gallahad Associates v. Rose, 392 So.2d 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). In Travelers Insurance Co. v. Bruns, 429 So.2d 317 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), this court distinguished Rose and held that, under Rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iv), this court does not have jurisdiction to review these orders. We also decline to review this order through certiorari. We acknowledge that this opinion and Bruns are in direct conflict with Alamo Rent-a-Car, Inc. v. Summers, 404 So.2d 131 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), and P. H. Vehicle Rental and Leasing Corp. v. Garner, 416 So.2d 503 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).

Accordingly, this appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

ANSTEAD, C.J., and HERSEY and DELL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Florida Power Light Co. v. Hogue

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Oct 7, 1983
438 So. 2d 975 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
Case details for

Florida Power Light Co. v. Hogue

Case Details

Full title:FLORIDA POWER LIGHT COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. EMERY F. HOGUE, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Oct 7, 1983

Citations

438 So. 2d 975 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

Citing Cases

Florida Power Light Company v. Hogue

Application for Review of the Decision of the District Court of Appeal — Direct Conflict of Decisions, Fourth…

Agency Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Braverman

Appellants mischaracterize the appealed order as one determining insurance coverage, the cases cited which…