Narrative Opinion Summary
The Amended Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage and the Order on Wife’s Attorney’s Fees, both entered on August 27, 1999, are deemed not to be final orders, leading the court to conclude it lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal or cross-appeal related to these orders. Consequently, both the appeal and cross-appeal are dismissed without prejudice, allowing either party to seek review once a final judgment is issued by the trial court. The decision was concurred by Chief Judge Barfield and Judges Kahn and Davis.
Legal Issues Addressed
Dismissal Without Prejudicesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appeal and cross-appeal were dismissed without prejudice, allowing for future review upon the issuance of a final judgment by the trial court.
Reasoning: Consequently, both the appeal and cross-appeal are dismissed without prejudice, allowing either party to seek review once a final judgment is issued by the trial court.
Finality of Orders for Appellate Jurisdictionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that the orders in question were not final, and thus it lacked jurisdiction to hear the appeals.
Reasoning: The Amended Final Judgment of Dissolution of Marriage and the Order on Wife’s Attorney’s Fees, both entered on August 27, 1999, are deemed not to be final orders, leading the court to conclude it lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal or cross-appeal related to these orders.