RALPH RAYBURN, APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID A. CARO, M.D., AN INDIVIDUAL, AND ORANGE PARK MEDICAL CENTER, D/B/A ORANGE PARK MEDICAL CENTER, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE PHYSICIANS, INC./ BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEAN C. LOHSE, M.D., NORTHEAST FLORIDA NEUROSURGERY, P.A., ALEXANDER N. MCINNIS, M.D., EMILE A. LATOUR, M.D., AND DOCTORS HURT, ISAAC, JOHNSON & CRANFORD, P.A., APPELLEES
RALPH RAYBURN, APPELLANT,
DAVID A. CARO, M.D., AN INDIVIDUAL, AND ORANGE PARK MEDICAL CENTER, D/B/A ORANGE PARK MEDICAL CENTER, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE PHYSICIANS, INC./ BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEAN C. LOHSE, M.D., NORTHEAST FLORIDA NEUROSURGERY, P.A., ALEXANDER N. MCINNIS, M.D., EMILE A. LATOUR, M.D., AND DOCTORS HURT, ISAAC, JOHNSON & CRANFORD, P.A., APPELLEES
789 So. 2d 538
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2001)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Having considered the appellant’s response to the Court’s order of May 16, 2001, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The dismissal is without prejudice to the appellant’s right to seek review upon entry of a final order. BARFIELD, DAVIS, and LEWIS, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Waters v. Childers, 198 So. 3d 1007 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…t summarily denied the motion, and this appeal followed. A party can seek relief under rule 1.540(b) when he or she does not receive a copy of an order entered by the court until after the time for filing an appeal has expired. See Newell v. Moore, 789 So. 2d 538, 539 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Griffin v. Fla, Parole Comm’n, 727 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Brown v. State, 708 So. 2d 1041 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Woldarsky v. Woldarsky, 243 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). If the motion is facially sufficient and n…
-
Newell v. Moore, 819 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…to his earlier appeal. In that appeal this court determined that the appellant had made a facially sufficient claim under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b), and this court reversed the trial court’s denial of that motion. See Newell v. Moore, 789 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). In thereafter denying the rule 9.400(a) costs motion the trial court found that the appellant is not entitled to such relief because he did not prevail on the merits of his earlier claim. But a rule 9.400(a) costs award does not…
-
G.C. and D.C. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 796 So. 2d 1291 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…d that this was due to the trial court’s failure to provide them with timely written notice of rendition of the order. Thus our previous dismissal of appeal 5D00-644 as being untimely was improvident and we grant belated review. See Newell v. Moore, 789 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Gibson v. Buice, 381 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). We reject the Department’s contention that this appeal is somehow moot. In light of this court’s decision in G.C. v. Department of Children and Families, 791 So. 2d 17 (Fla.…