CHRISTOPHER COLON, APPELLANT,
v.
NATIONWIDE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Summary Judgment Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
Christopher Colon appeals from a summary final judgment entered in favor of Nationwide Life Insurance Company. Nationwide concedes that the order of summary final judgment is erroneous in several respects. Although Nationwide urges this court to remand for limited corrections, the substantive errors that are apparent on the face of the record, coupled with the incomplete record and problematic procedural history in this case, compel us to reverse the summary final judgment in its entirety and remand for further proceedings. Our opinion should not be read as suggesting that this case cannot be resolved by summary judgment. However, based on the record before us and Nationwide’s concessions, we agree with Colon that summary judgment was improperly granted.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
VILLANTI, J., Concurs.
SILBERMAN, J., Concurs in result only.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (29 total)
-
Almacenes EL Globo de Quito v. Dalbeta L.C., 181 So. 3d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)…der on appeal. Rule 9.110(k) provides for appellate jurisdiction to hear a partial final judgment only when the claims adjudicated by that order are separate and independent from the portion of the case still to be adjudicated. Jensen v. Whetstine, 985 So. 2d 1218, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); see also Cicco v. Luckett Tobaccos, Inc., 934 So. 2d 560, 561 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). If all claims arise from the same set of facts, an order resolving fewer than all of the counts is not appealable under Rule 9.110(k). GEICO…
-
Conti v. B & E Holdings, LLC, 61 So. 3d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…tegral part of the foreclosure action). Further, the order does not dispose of a separate and distinct cause of action because the pending foreclosure action is interrelated with the claim disposed of by the order on appeal. See Jensen v. Whetstine, 985 So. 2d 1218, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (analyzing whether order dis [*1273] posed of a separate and distinct cause of action). Therefore, the Court lacks appellate jurisdiction to review the instant order at this time. Fla. R.App. P. 9.080(b)(1)(A). DISMISSED.…
-
Herbits v. The City OF Miami, 197 So. 3d 575 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…ito, S.A v. Dalbeta L.C., 181 So. 3d 559 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015). For a final order to be appealable as a “partial final judgment” under Rule 9.110(k), however, that final order must be entirely independent from other pleaded claims. Jensen v. Whetstine, 985 So. 2d 1218, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); see also Cicco v. Luckett Tobaccos, Inc., 934 So. 2d 560, 561 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). Rule 9.110(k) is simply not applicable to this case. At the time Herbits appealed the trial court’s December Order on Janu [*579] ary 2, 20…
Previewing 3 of 29 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence