From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arthur v. Smith

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 19, 2009
8 So. 3d 502 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

Opinion

No. 1D09-0981.

May 19, 2009.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bradford County. Peter K. Sieg, Judge.

Daniel P. Arthur, and Florence D. Gata, pro se, Appellants.

James J. Taylor, Keystone Heights, for Appellees.


Upon consideration of the appellants' response to the Court's order of March 5, 2009, the Court has determined that the December 30, 2008, order does not represent a conclusion to the judicial labor in this matter. The claims disposed of by the orders on appeal are inextricably intertwined with the counterclaims that remain pending, and the appeal is therefore pre-mature. Cf. Mass. Life Ins. Co. v. Crapo, 918 So.2d 393 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed as premature.

BARFIELD, KAHN, and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Arthur v. Smith

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 19, 2009
8 So. 3d 502 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)
Case details for

Arthur v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:Daniel P. ARTHUR, and Florence D. Gata, Appellants, v. Stephen F. SMITH…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: May 19, 2009

Citations

8 So. 3d 502 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

Citing Cases

Skop v. P3 Group, L.L.C.

As such, appellate review of the order, under this circumstance, is premature. See S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v.…