JIMMIE L. WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, ET AL., APPELLEES
ORFINGER, Judge.
The motion to dismiss the appeal is granted because the notice of appeal was not timely. An order entered under Rule 1.540(b) is a non-final order. Smith v. Weede, 433 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). A motion for rehearing is authorized only as to a final order, so when addressed to a non-final order it does not delay rendition of that order. Hofer v. Gil De Rubio, 409 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Fla.R. App.P. 9.020(g). The notice of appeal was filed more than 30 days from rendition of the order sought to be reviewed, so we have no jurisdiction. Smith, supra; Ramos v. State, 456 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., and CO-WART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Caufield v. Gino Cantele, 837 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 2002)…(h). Because motions for rehearing are not authorized as to nonfinal orders, they can not delay the rendering of a nonfinal order. See Wagner v. Bieley, Wagner & Assocs., 263 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1972); Williams v. Dep’t of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 468 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). Consequently, a motion for rehearing of a nonfinal order will not toll the time for filing a petition for certiorari. See Green Tree Vendor Servs. Corp. v. Lisi, 732 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Shelnutt v. Citrus County, 660…
-
Dist. Sch. Bd. OF ST. Johns Cnty. v. Timoney, 524 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…motion for reconsideration below which has not yet been decided. However, the order in question is clearly interlocutory and therefore a motion for rehearing is not authorized. See, e.g., Williams v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 468 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Gordon v. Barley, 383 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Since rendition of a reviewable order is only tolled by an authorized motion for rehearing as set forth in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(g), the School Board’s mo…
-
McGEE v. McGEE, 487 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)…horized to be taken from an interlocutory or non-final order, and therefore does not delay the time of filing a writ of. certio-rari. Owens v. Jackson, 476 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Williams v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 468 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Hofer v. Gil De Rubio, 409 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). In the present case, the writ of certiorari was untimely because the petition for rehearing was not authorized. Therefore, the date of rendition was September 21, 1985…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Smith v. Weede, 433 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Emil Albert Dealto v. The Honorable Richard B. Keating, 409 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Litem v. Maritz GIL DE Rubio and Ferdinand Gil De Rubio, 409 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Ramos v. State, 456 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)