North American Company v. Landahl

6 Citing cases

  1. State v. Smith

    177 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1965)   Cited 2 times

    " North American Co. v. Landahl (Fla.App. 2d District, 1958) 107 So.2d 749, reached the same result. The court stated:

  2. Burlingham v. Allen

    295 So. 2d 684 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)   Cited 3 times

    2, subd. a(2)(a) FAR, the two cases shall thereafter proceed as two separate and distinct appeals. We have not overlooked North American Company v. Landahl, Fla.App.2d 1958, 107 So.2d 749 wherein a single notice of appeal was held to have been sufficient for review of two separate judgments in a case in which a husband and wife were joined together in a suit for physical injuries sustained by the wife, the husband's claim being derivative. The jury returned two verdicts and separate judgments were entered. It was held in that case that one notice of appeal was sufficient because the separate verdicts and judgments were merely allocations of damages as between the husband and the wife.

  3. Strickland v. Muir

    173 So. 2d 461 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1965)   Cited 1 times

    The cases cited by the appellees are distinguishable in that all involved separate and distinct final judgments. Orange Belt Packing Co. v. International Agricultural Corporation, 1933, 112 Fla. 99, 150 So. 264; Borland v. South Patrick Utility Corp., Fla.App. 1960, 122 So.2d 44; Vander Car v. Pitts, Fla.App. 1964, 166 So.2d 837; Dye v. Reichard, Fla.App. 1964, 169 So.2d 39. This court declined to dismiss a defendant's appeal even though separate and distinct judgments were sought to be reviewed by a single notice of appeal in North American Company v. Landahl, Fla.App. 1958, 107 So.2d 749. The judgments in that case were based on a single complaint and a single trial and the pleadings and conduct of the case gave the defendant-appellant "no indication that separate and distinct causes were being tried * * *." The appellees' contention that separate notices of appeal should always be required to review separate causes of action is contrary to our holding in the North American Company case, supra.

  4. Dye v. Reichard

    169 So. 2d 39 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)   Cited 4 times

    See also Vander Car v. Pitts, Fla.App. 1964, 166 So.2d 837, and Borland v. South Patrick Utility Corp., Fla.App. 1960, 122 So.2d 44. In support of his contention that one notice of appeal is sufficient the appellant cites North American Company v. Landahl, Fla.App. 1958, 107 So.2d 749, in which a husband and wife joined together under Fla. Stat., Sec. 46.09, F.S.A., in suing for physical injuries sustained by the wife. The jury returned two verdicts and separate judgments were entered. It was held that one notice of appeal was sufficient because the separate verdicts and judgments were simply allocations of damages to the husband and wife. The case on review is distinguishable, however, in that the husband and wife were suing for injuries caused to each of them individually and separately, whereas, in the Landahl case, supra, the husband's claim was of a derivative nature.

  5. DRUMMOND BLOW TITLE CORP. v. BLATNICK

    157 So. 2d 711 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963)   Cited 4 times
    In Drummond Blow Title Corp. v. Blatnick, 157 So.2d 711, the Third District Court of Appeal, in effect, held that where two judgments were entered in the same case, both judgments were properly included in a single notice of appeal since they were entered in one case in the trial court.

    A motion by appellees to dismiss the appeal presents the question of whether a single appeal may be taken from two judgments entered in a cause. We hold that it may, and deny the motion to dismiss on authority of North American Company v. Landahl, Fla.App. 1958, 107 So.2d 749. Appellees cited Orange Belt Packing Co. v. International Agr. Corp., (1933) 112 Fla. 99, 150 So. 264, in which the Supreme Court said: "It is well settled that separate causes cannot, as a general rule, be brought up by a single writ of error," and Borland v. South Patrick Utility Corp., Fla.App. 1960, 122 So.2d 44, where it was held that separate notices of appeal were necessary to appeal two judgments rendered in separate cases, even though such causes had been consolidated for trial for convenience.

  6. Borland v. South Patrick Utility

    122 So. 2d 44 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1960)   Cited 9 times

    The appellant then filed a single notice of appeal to review both cases. In the case of North American Co. v. Landahl, Fla.App. 1958, 107 So.2d 749, decided by this court, we held that in an appeal from judgments in a tort action instituted by a husband and wife in conformity with ยง 46.09 Fla. Stat., F.S.A., only one notice of appeal was necessary. In that case, however, there was only one complaint involved.