25 So. 3d 599
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
2009
PER CURIAM.

Arlene Pécora appeals the Broward Circuit Court’s non-final order “abating” her action pending resolution of a parallel receivership proceeding in Miami-Dade County.1 An order abating or staying an action pending disposition of another action is not a reviewable non-final order. See REWJB Gas Invs. v. Land O’Sun Realty, Ltd., 645 So.2d 1055 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Hedin v. Indian River County, 610 So.2d 715 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). We treat the appeal as a petition for writ of certio-rari and deny the petition in light of the Third District’s per curiam affirmance of the Miami-Dade Circuit Court’s jurisdiction, see Pecora v. Berlin, 23 So.3d 727 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009), and leave undisturbed the “abatement” of the petitioner’s action in Broward County.

Petition denied.

WARNER, LEVINE, JJ., and McCANN, JAMES W., Associate Judge, concur.

Notes

. Although the trial court designated its order as an abatement, the order was effectively a stay, as it did not terminate the action. See Century Sur. Co. v. de Moraes, 998 So.2d 662, 663 n. 1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) ("Abatement has been utilized to terminate one of two actions pending simultaneously which involve the same parties and the same issues. A stay, by contrast, essentially postpones one proceeding until a contingency occurs.”).