From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miller v. Samuel E. Mason, Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Dec 22, 2005
917 So. 2d 310 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Summary

explaining that an order granting a motion to set aside a clerk's default is not a final order or judgment

Summary of this case from Westwood One, Inc. v. Flight Express, Inc.

Opinion

No. 1D05-4180.

December 22, 2005.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Union County. Stan R. Morris, Judge.

Appellant, pro se.

Louis A. Vargas, General Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Upon consideration of the appellant's response to the Court's order of October 10, 2005, the Court has determined that the "Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration of Granting Motion to Set Aside Default as to Defendant Samuel E. Mason," is not an appealable order. Specifically, because the underlying order granting a motion to set aside a clerk's default is not a final order or judgment, see Dawkins, Inc. v. Huff, 836 So.2d 1062, 1065 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003), the order denying the appellant's motion for reconsideration is not reviewable. See Bennett's Leasing, Inc. v. First Street Mortgage Corp., 870 So.2d 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (holding that an order on a motion to vacate directed to nonfinal order is not appealable). Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

BARFIELD, WOLF, and BROWNING, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Miller v. Samuel E. Mason, Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Dec 22, 2005
917 So. 2d 310 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

explaining that an order granting a motion to set aside a clerk's default is not a final order or judgment

Summary of this case from Westwood One, Inc. v. Flight Express, Inc.
Case details for

Miller v. Samuel E. Mason, Co.

Case Details

Full title:Danny MILLER, Appellant, v. SAMUEL E. MASON, CO., Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Dec 22, 2005

Citations

917 So. 2d 310 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Citing Cases

Westwood One, Inc. v. Flight Express, Inc.

At the same time the order granting Flight Express' motion for default does not qualify for review as a…