History
  • No items yet
midpage
Meadows v. Ward
306 So. 2d 179
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1975
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

Appellants seek an interlocutory appeal from a dismissal with prejudice of their cross-claim against appellees who were co-defendants with appellants in a suit brought by another for a real estate commission.

Plaintiff’s cause of action, the cross-claim and all defenses raised involve the same transaction; and the essence of all of them sounds at law. Additionally, the factual issues inherent in the transaction remain viable and all parties are still in the law suit.

In view whereof the order appealed from, being one at law and not relating to a separate transaction or a third-party defendant no longer in the action, is an interlocutory order not amenable to appeal pursuant to Rule 4.2, F.A.R.1

Accordingly, we are without jurisdiction and are compelled, ex mero motUj to dismiss the appeal.

Appeal dismissed.

McNULTY, C. J., and HOBSON and SCHEB, JJ., concur.

. See S.L.T. Warehouse Company v. Webb (Fla.1974), 304 So.2d 97.

Case Details

Case Name: Meadows v. Ward
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Jan 17, 1975
Citation: 306 So. 2d 179
Docket Number: No. 74-1151
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.