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.

Skoran v. Seacoast Utility Authority

Citations: 60 So. 3d 1174; 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 7240; 2011 WL 1885325Docket: No. 1D11-0946

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; May 18, 2011; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The appeal and cross-appeal have been dismissed without prejudice, allowing the Appellant to seek review upon entry of a final order. The court references the precedent established in Mintz v. Broward Corr. Inst., which clarifies that an order granting a motion to dismiss by an employer/carrier is not considered an appealable final order. Similar rulings in Truc v. Kimmins Corp. and Dedge v. Crosby reinforce this position, stating that an order granting a motion to dismiss, whether with or without prejudice, does not constitute a final order for appeal purposes. The judges, BENTON, C.J., WEBSTER, and VAN NORTWICK, concur in this decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appealability of Orders Granting Motion to Dismiss

Application: The court determined that an order granting a motion to dismiss is not an appealable final order, thereby dismissing the appeal and cross-appeal without prejudice.

Reasoning: The court references the precedent established in Mintz v. Broward Corr. Inst., which clarifies that an order granting a motion to dismiss by an employer/carrier is not considered an appealable final order.

Final Order Requirement for Appeals

Application: The court highlighted that only final orders are appealable, and since the dismissal order did not constitute a final order, the parties may seek review only upon entry of a final order.

Reasoning: The appeal and cross-appeal have been dismissed without prejudice, allowing the Appellant to seek review upon entry of a final order.

Precedential Support for Non-Appealability

Application: The decision was supported by previous cases, which consistently held that orders granting motions to dismiss do not qualify as final orders, thereby reinforcing the legal standard applied in this case.

Reasoning: Similar rulings in Truc v. Kimmins Corp. and Dedge v. Crosby reinforce this position, stating that an order granting a motion to dismiss, whether with or without prejudice, does not constitute a final order for appeal purposes.