Allen v. Allen
Decision Date | 23 December 1969 |
Docket Number | No. L-314,L-314 |
Parties | Patricia Ann Gilmer ALLEN, Appellant, v. W. Frank ALLEN, Jr., Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
R. Diane Burlingham, DeLand, for appellant.
Philip Tatich, of Gurney & Skolfield, Winter Park, for appellee.
This is an interlocutory appeal by the plaintiff in a suit for separate maintenance.
The order sought to be reversed was rendered March 5, 1969, and by its tenor purported to amend and modify an earlier order of dismissal without prejudice pursuant to plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal. Said earlier order was rendered on January 15, 1969. Under the provisions of Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.530, 31 Florida Statutes Annotated, the lower court had jurisdiction to amend or modify the order of dismissal only for ten days after rendition which in this case would have been until January 27, 1969, since the terminal days of that ten-day period were a Saturday and Sunday. Appellee's motion resulting in the order now under review was filed on January 29, 1969, after the court below lost jurisdiction to amend or modify the order of dismissal.
Since the order herein appealed was rendered after the trial court lost jurisdiction, it must be reversed on authority of Kippy Corporation v. Colburn, 177 So.2d 193 (Fla.1965).
Reversed.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Beeman's Estate, In re, 78-834
...modify or vacate an order or judgment. 236 So.2d at 3. See also Denny v. Denny, 334 So.2d 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976); Allen v. Allen, 230 So.2d 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969). Since the Florida Rules of Probate and Guardianship Procedure do not presently provide for motions for rehearing and inasmuch ......
-
Hoffman v. Hoffman, 78-791
...BARKDULL and HUBBART, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Kippy Corporation v. Colburn, 177 So.2d 193 (Fla.1965); and see Allen v. Allen, 230 So.2d 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969). ...
-
Kitzmiller v. Southeast Services, Inc., 77-2002
...as attorney's fees for the plaintiff. The motion to amend final judgment was not timely under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.530(g). See Allen v. Allen, 230 So.2d 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969). The motion was not a proper motion under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540. Cf. Kuykendall v. Kuykendall, 301 So.2d 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1......