Narrative Opinion Summary
The Court dismisses the appeal for lack of jurisdiction regarding the September 10, 2002 order that granted the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss Count II of Capital Truck, Inc.'s counterclaim. The counterclaim is deemed a compulsory one, and all related claims require factual determinations about the transferability of a franchise interest. Consequently, the dismissal is not considered a final appealable order or an appealable partial final judgment, as supported by precedent (Campbell v. Gordon, 674 So.2d 783, 785 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)) and applicable rules (Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(k, m. 2002)). The appeal is dismissed, with all judges concurring.
Legal Issues Addressed
Compulsory Counterclaimssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: When a counterclaim is compulsory, it involves necessary factual determinations, which affect the appealability of related orders.
Reasoning: The counterclaim is deemed a compulsory one, and all related claims require factual determinations about the transferability of a franchise interest.
Final Order Requirement for Appealssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: An order must be final or an appealable partial final judgment to be eligible for appellate review, based on existing legal precedent and procedural rules.
Reasoning: The dismissal is not considered a final appealable order or an appealable partial final judgment, as supported by precedent (Campbell v. Gordon, 674 So.2d 783, 785 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)) and applicable rules (Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(k, m. 2002)).
Jurisdiction and Appealability of Orderssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal of an order that is not final or does not qualify as an appealable partial final judgment.
Reasoning: The Court dismisses the appeal for lack of jurisdiction regarding the September 10, 2002 order that granted the plaintiffs' motion to dismiss Count II of Capital Truck, Inc.'s counterclaim.