ABNER M. CONTRERAS
v.
DAVID FERNANDEZ

Fla. 3d DCA | 2024-10-02
No. 3D2024-0894
2024 FL 11714 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2024)

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.


Holding

An order granting a motion to dismiss a complaint is not a final, reviewable order unless it contains words of finality indicating that the cause is dismissed.


Headnotes

[1] An order granting a motion to dismiss a complaint lacks finality and is not appealable unless it contains words of finality indicating that the cause is dismissed.

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“Once again we caution trial judges and attorneys alike that this court lacks jurisdiction over an order granting a motion to dismiss a complaint, when that order does not contain the requisite words of finality indicating that the cause is dismissed.”

Court's citation to precedent establishing finality requirement

Facts & Procedural History

Abner M. Contreras appealed from a county court order that granted a motion to dismiss his second amended complaint. The order stated only that the mo…

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.


Opinion of the Court

Opinion filed October 2, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-0894 Lower Tribunal No. 23-10266-CC-05

________________

Abner M. Contreras,

Appellant,

vs.

David Fernandez,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Diana Gonzalez-Whyte, Judge. Abner M. Contreras, in proper person. Law Offices of Robert P. Frankel, P.A., and Robert P. Frankel (Plantation), for appellee. Before LINDSEY, MILLER, and GORDO, JJ. PER CURIAM. Before us on appeal is an order dismissing Appellant Abner M. Contreras’s second amended complaint. The order merely states that the corrected motion to dismiss the second amended complaint “is granted.” It neither contains words of finality nor enters a dismissal in Appellee David Fernandez’s favor. Because this is not a final order capable of review, we lack jurisdiction to do so. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See Henrion v. New Era Realty IV, Inc., 567 So. 2d 562, 563 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (“Once again we caution trial judges and attorneys alike that this court lacks jurisdiction over an order granting a motion to dismiss a complaint, when that order does not contain the requisite words of finality indicating that the cause is dismissed.”).

Dismissed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw