B. G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 78-789
| Decision Date | 19 June 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 78-789,78-789 |
| Citation | 372 So.2d 184 |
| Parties | B. G. LEASING, INC., etc., et al., Appellants, v. Marion HEIDER, et ux., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Adams & Ward and Amy Shield Levine, Miami, for appellants.
Horton, Perse & Ginsberg and Arnold R. Ginsberg, Miami, Bernard H. Butts, Hialeah, for appellees.
Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and BARKDULL and KEHOE, JJ.
A party was injured by an automobile owned by B. G. Leasing, Inc., leased to Arthur Manners and driven by his wife, Blanche Gordon Manners. The Manners were insured by Travelers Insurance Company.
Suit was instituted by the injured party and her husband against the lessor and the Manners, together with Travelers. After an adverse jury verdict, final judgment was entered against the insureds (B. G. Leasing, Inc. and the Manners) and their insurer. See: Hertz Corporation v. Pugh, 354 So.2d 966 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Thereafter, the trial court entered an amended final judgment, deleting two of the three insureds (the Manners). This appeal was taken more than thirty days from the original final judgment, but within thirty days of the amended final judgment.
No error is urged in the amended final judgment by the appellants. The amended final judgment did not change the status of the remaining insured and Travelers from the original final judgment. Therefore, the appeal is untimely as to the original final judgment and same is dismissed. See: Betts v. Fowelin, 203 So.2d 630 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967), wherein the following is found:
Also see: Salinger v. Salinger, 100 So.2d 393 (Fla.1958).
Appeal dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marriage of Mullinax, Matter of
...the time allowed for appeal. See Perfection Stove Co. v. Scherer, 120 Ohio 445, 166 N.E. 376 (1929). Compare B. G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 372 So.2d 184, 185 (Fla.App.1979). This court has previously neither expressly adopted nor rejected such a rule. However, the reasoning expressed in de......
-
First Continental Corp. v. Khan, 91-2641
...Hotel v. Daughtry, 249 So.2d 27, 28 (Fla.1971); Janelli v. Pagano, 492 So.2d 796, 796-797 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); B.G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 372 So.2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Bonura v. Holloway, 334 So.2d 842 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Drummond v. Gerwe, 264 So.2d 474 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Brick v.......
-
Maxfly Aviation, Inc. v. Capital Airlines Ltd.
...taking an appeal is tolled only if the second order changes matters of substance or resolves a genuine ambiguity. B.G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 372 So.2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). The test is whether the court in the second order has disturbed or revised legal rights and obligations which had......
-
Daytona Migi Corp. v. Daytona Automotive Fiberglass Inc.
...an appeal is tolled only if the second order changes matters of substance or resolves a genuine ambiguity. B. G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 372 So.2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). The test is whether the court in the second order has disturbed or revised legal rights and obligations which had been ......