You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Pecora v. Signature Gardens, Ltd.

Citations: 25 So. 3d 599; 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 19249; 2009 WL 4641714Docket: No. 4D09-1192

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; December 8, 2009; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, an appellant challenges a non-final order from the Broward Circuit Court that abated her action pending a parallel receivership proceeding in Miami-Dade County. The appellate court notes that such orders typically are not reviewable as non-final orders, referencing precedents such as REWJB Gas Invs. v. Land O’Sun Realty, Ltd. The appeal was thus treated as a petition for writ of certiorari, which was denied. This decision aligns with the Third District's prior affirmation of the Miami-Dade Circuit Court's jurisdiction in a related matter, Pecora v. Berlin. The court clarified that the abatement order functioned as a stay, as it did not terminate the action but postponed it pending resolution of the parallel matter. Judges WARNER, LEVINE, and McCANN concurred with this interpretation, reinforcing the distinction between abatement and stay in legal proceedings. Consequently, the appellant's action remains stayed, awaiting the outcome of the Miami-Dade proceedings.

Legal Issues Addressed

Distinction Between Abatement and Stay

Application: The court clarified that while the trial court labeled its order as an abatement, it functioned as a stay since it did not terminate the action.

Reasoning: The court maintains the abatement of Pécora’s action, clarifying that while the trial court labeled its order as an abatement, it functioned as a stay since it did not terminate the action.

Jurisdiction and Parallel Proceedings

Application: The decision was influenced by the Third District's affirmation of the Miami-Dade Circuit Court's jurisdiction in a related case, leading to the maintenance of the abatement.

Reasoning: This decision is influenced by the Third District's affirmation of the Miami-Dade Circuit Court's jurisdiction in a related case (Pecora v. Berlin).

Reviewability of Non-Final Orders

Application: The court determined that an order to abate or stay an action pending another action is generally not reviewable as a non-final order.

Reasoning: The court notes that an order to abate or stay an action pending another action is generally not a reviewable non-final order, citing case law (REWJB Gas Invs. v. Land O’Sun Realty, Ltd. and Hedin v. Indian River County).

Treatment of Appeals as Petitions for Writ of Certiorari

Application: The appeal was treated as a petition for writ of certiorari, which was ultimately denied by the court.

Reasoning: The appeal is treated as a petition for writ of certiorari, which is ultimately denied.