Opinion
No. 3D23-549
05-03-2023
Jose SANZ, Appellant, v. Myriam SAENZ, Appellee.
Spittler & Associates, P.A., and John J. Spittler, Jr., for appellant. Richard J. Preira & Associates, and Richard J. Preira, for appellee.
Spittler & Associates, P.A., and John J. Spittler, Jr., for appellant.
Richard J. Preira & Associates, and Richard J. Preira, for appellee.
Before EMAS, SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ.
On Motion to Dismiss
PER CURIAM. In this ongoing marriage dissolution action, appellant/husband Jose Sanz, on March 27, 2023, filed a Notice of Appeal challenging that portion of a January 12, 2023 trial court order (the "January 12 Order") awarding temporary professional fees and costs to appellee/wife Myriam Saenz.
The challenged order requires, among other things, that appellant pay $275,291.61 into appellee's counsel's trust "immediately upon entry of this Order."
The January 12 Order was an appealable, nonfinal order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(iii) a. See Seward v. Seward, 676 So. 2d 49, 49 n.1 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) ; see also Odeh v. Odeh, 347 So. 3d 376, 378 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021).
Because the January 12 Order was nonfinal, appellant's January 26, 2023 motion for rehearing directed toward the January 12 Order was unauthorized and did not toll the rendition of the January 12 Order. Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(a)(5). To invoke this Court's appellate jurisdiction to review the January 12 Order, therefore, appellant's Notice of Appeal had to be filed within thirty days after the rendition of the January 12 Order. Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(b).
Thus, appellant's March 27, 2023 notice of appeal was untimely, and we are compelled to grant appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal as we are without appellate jurisdiction to review the January 12 Order. See Samara v. Tenet Fla. Physician Servs., LLC, 317 So. 3d 187, 189 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
Motion to dismiss granted; appeal dismissed.