History
  • No items yet
midpage
Helker v. Gouldy
181 So. 2d 536
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1966
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

The motion of appellee The Prudential Insurance Company of America to dismiss the appeal is denied.

The chancellor’s order appealed' from was interlocutory. This appeal, final' in form, will be treated as interlocutory on authority of Mitchell v. Italian-American Club, Fla.App.1960, 122 So.2d 228, and Washington Security Co. v. Tracy’s Plumbing & Pumps, Inc., Fla.App. 1965, 166 So.2d 680, no undue hardship to appellees having-been made to appear, by incident delay or otherwise.1

“Appeals to the Supreme Court and the District Courts of Appeal are constitutionally guaranteed rights in this State. This being true, it is fundamental that statutes or rules regulating the exercise of suck rights should be liberally construed in favor of the appealing party and in the interest of manifest justice.” Robbins v. Cipes, Fla.App.1966, 181 So.2d 521.

The time within which appellants may file the appeal papers, appellants’ brief and' appendix, as provided for by Rule 4.2 F.A.R. is hereby fixed at 15 days from the date of this order, and thereupon the appeal shall' proceed as provided for by the appellate-rules for such interlocutory appeal.

It is so ordered.

. The appeal was commenced December 14, 1965. Appellee’s motion to dismiss, filed December 81, 1965, stayed progress of the appeal pending disposition of the motion. Rule 39, subd. f, F.A.R., 31. F.S.A.

Case Details

Case Name: Helker v. Gouldy
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Jan 12, 1966
Citation: 181 So. 2d 536
Docket Number: No. 65-990
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.