WILLIAM W. NOWRY, AS TRUSTEE OF BILLWALL CONSTRUCTION, INC., A DISSOLVED FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
STAN COLLYAR AND LISA COLLYAR, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF ERIC COLLYAR, DECEASED, ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Second District Court of Appeal certified to the Florida Supreme Court a conflict among district courts regarding whether an order denying a motion to dismiss for untimely service under Rule 1.070(i) is a nonappealable, non-final order.
An order denying a motion to dismiss based on failure to effect service within 120 days under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(i) is a nonappealable, non-final order that does not determine jurisdiction over the person.
[1] An order denying a motion to dismiss based on failure to effect service within 120 days under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(i) is a nonappealable, non-final order…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Nowry, as trustee of a dissolved Florida corporation, appealed an order denying his motion to dismiss for appellees' failure to effect servi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Certification Of Conflict cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This court granted appellees’ motion to dismiss this nonappealable, non-final appeal. Appellant then filed a motion for certification alleging conflict among the district courts of appeal. At the trial court, appellant had sought dismissal because of appellees’ failure to effect service within one hundred twenty days pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.070(i).
Our ruling granting appellant’s motion to dismiss is consistent with prior decisions of this court. See Khandjicm v. Compagnie Financiere Mediterranee Cofimed, S.A., 619 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993). However, we acknowledge that this decision is in conflict with decisions of other districts. See Comisky v. Rosen Management Service, Inc., 630 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994) (en banc)-, Mid-Florida Associates, Ltd. v. Taylor, 641 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). We therefore grant appellant’s motion for certification and certify this question to the Florida Supreme Court to resolve a conflict among the district courts of appeal:
DOES AN ORDER DENYING A MOTION TO DISMISS A COMPLAINT CLAIMING UNTIMELY SERVICE PURSUANT TO FLORIDA RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1.070(i) FAIL TO CONSTITUTE AN ORDER DETERMINING THE JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON, THUS MAKING IT A NONAPPEALABLE, NON-FINAL ORDER?
RYDER, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Berge O. Khandjian and Tuula Khandjian v. Compagnie Financiere Mediterranee Cofimed, S.A., 619 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Comisky v. Rosen Mgmt. Serv., Inc., 630 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Mid-Florida Assocs., Ltd. v. Taylor, 641 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)