From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Klepetko v. Chapman

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
May 29, 2012
90 So. 3d 287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

Opinion

No. 2D12–788.

2012-05-29

Lawrence KLEPETKO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Stephanie CHAPMAN, et al, Appellee/Respondent(s).


BY ORDER OF THE COURT.

This proceeding is dismissed as untimely as to the order rendered July 14, 2011.

This proceeding is dismissed as untimely as to the order rendered August 3, 2011. See also Mcllveen v. Mcllveen, 644 So.2d 612 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (holding that an order merely granting entitlement to fees is not appealable).

As to the county court orders rendered December 14, 2011, and January 11, 2012, this proceeding is transferred to the appellate division of the circuit court of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit. SeeFla. R.App. P. 9.040(b)(1), 9.030(c)(1)(A).

The appellee's motion to dismiss is denied as moot.

The appellant's motion for stay pending review is denied as moot.

LaROSE, MORRIS, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.


Summaries of

Klepetko v. Chapman

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
May 29, 2012
90 So. 3d 287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)
Case details for

Klepetko v. Chapman

Case Details

Full title:Lawrence KLEPETKO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Stephanie CHAPMAN, et al…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Date published: May 29, 2012

Citations

90 So. 3d 287 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)