Opinion
6D23-2426
01-12-2024
Ruben Fuentes and Yaimet Muro, Appellants, v. Yuhi Landholdings, LLC, Yuhi Investments LLC, Lee County, City of Fort Myers, and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., Appellees.
Richard F. DeVall, of Zinnlaw PLLC, Fort Myers, for Appellants. Rachel A. Kerlek, of Woods, Weidenmiller, Michetti &Rudnick, LLP, Naples, for Appellee, Yuhi Landholdings, LLC. No Appearance for Appellees, Yuhi Investments LLC, Lee County, City of Fort Myers, and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County. James Shenko, Judge. Lower Tribunal No. 21-CA-003790
Richard F. DeVall, of Zinnlaw PLLC, Fort Myers, for Appellants.
Rachel A. Kerlek, of Woods, Weidenmiller, Michetti &Rudnick, LLP, Naples, for Appellee, Yuhi Landholdings, LLC.
No Appearance for Appellees, Yuhi Investments LLC, Lee County, City of Fort Myers, and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.
PER CURIAM.
We have for review a final judgment for Appellee Yuhi Landholdings, LLC. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, however, that portion of the appeal seeking review of the trial court's determination that Appellee is entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs from Appellants but reserving jurisdiction to determine the amount thereof. See, e.g., Yampol v. Turnberry Isle S. Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 250 So.3d 835, 837 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) ("An order granting entitlement to attorney's fees but not determining the amount of fees or costs is a non-final, non-appealable order, and such an order is subject to dismissal for lack of jurisdiction."). This partial dismissal is without prejudice to Appellants' separate appeal from the trial court's subsequent order determining the amount of such fees and costs (Case No. 6D23-3594).
In all other respects, the final judgment is affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) ("When there are issues of fact the appellant necessarily asks the reviewing court to draw conclusions about the evidence. Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory. Without knowing the factual context, neither can an appellate court reasonably conclude that the trial judge so misconceived the law as to require reversal.").
AFFIRMED in part; DISMISSED in part.
MIZE, BROWNLEE and GANNAM, JJ., concur.