EDWARD V. HARRIS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
EDWARD V. HARRIS, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
870 So. 2d 65
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2003)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the appellant’s response to the Court’s order of September 25, 2003, the Court has determined that the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Thus, the Court lacks jurisdiction to review the order on appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed.
DISMISSED.
WOLF, C.J., LEWIS and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Harry Sendzischew, M.D. v. Johnson, 934 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. § 766.102(2), Fla. Stat. (2003); § 768.81(3)(6), Fla. Stat. (1991); Osler v. Collins, 870 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Hughes v. Slomka, 807 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Leavitt v. Krogen, 752 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000).…
-
Ingenix v. HAM, 35 So. 3d 949 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)…stand for the proposition that a policy provision controls when section 768.76(4) is otherwise applicable. The statute is clearly implicated here. This case presents the exact scenario section 768.76(4) was designed to address. In Osler v. Collins, 870 So. 2d 65, 67-68 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), this court held that where an insurance policy contains a right of reimbursement, as here, section 768.76(4) applies and requires a reduction of the amount of the insurer’s reimbursement by its pro rata share of costs and…1 / 2