Fisher v. INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSOCIATION

Citation827 So.2d 1096
Decision Date16 October 2002
Docket NumberNo. 1D02-2027.,1D02-2027.
PartiesVonceil FISHER and Traveine Howard, on their behalf, as representatives of a Class of Similarly Situated Longshore Workers, Appellants, v. The INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSOCIATION and the International Longshoremen's Association South Atlantic & Gulf Coast District, Appellees.
CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)

Stephen B. Gallagher, Edward L. Birk, and Sonya H. Hoener of Marks Gray Conroy Gibbs, Jacksonville; David E. Breskin, Stephen P. Connor, and Anne-Marie E. Sargent of Short, Cressmand & Burgess, Seattle, Washington, for Appellants.

Donald E. Pinaud, Jr., of Kattman & Pinaud, P.A., Jacksonville; James R. Watson, Galveston, Texas; Michael R. Yokan, Jacksonville; and Kevin Marrinan, of Gleason & Mathews, P.C., New York, New York, for Appellees.

EN BANC

PER CURIAM.

Having considered the appellees' Joint Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction, filed May 24, 2002, and the appellants' response, filed June 12, 2002, the motion to dismiss is hereby granted and this appeal is dismissed.

The Court's appellate jurisdiction to review nonfinal orders is limited to those categories of orders identified in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130. Nonfinal orders that determine "the jurisdiction of the person" are one category of appealable nonfinal orders. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(I). "The term `jurisdiction of the person' refers to service of process or to the applicability of the long arm statute to nonresidents." Warren v. Southeastern Leisure Systems, Inc., 522 So.2d 979, 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Therefore, only those interlocutory orders that determine issues involving service of process or the applicability of the long arm statute are appealable under this section of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130.

The nonfinal order on appeal granted in part a motion to dismiss, and dismissed several claims on grounds of federal preemption. Such an order relates to the right of the plaintiffs to maintain their action on these claims and is not appealable pursuant to Rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(I) because it does not determine jurisdiction of the person. See National Lake Developments, Inc. v. Lake Tippecanoe Owners Assoc., Inc., 417 So.2d 655 (Fla.1982)

; Warren, 522 So.2d at 980.

The appellants rely on an earlier case from this Court to support their argument that the instant order is appealable. In Southwest Gulfcoast, Inc. v. Allan, 513 So.2d 219 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), this Court allowed an appeal from an order denying a motion to dismiss that raised federal preemption grounds. While the Court recognized that the order on appeal denied a motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, Southwest Gulfcoast, 513 So.2d at 220, the Court found that the appeal was "perfected under rule 9.130, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, which authorizes review of the denial of the motion to dismiss only for lack of jurisdiction." Id. at 222. There is no indication that the issue of appellate jurisdiction was raised in Southwest Gulfcoast and there is no specific discussion of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Childers v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 28, 2006
    ...So.2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (en banc decision released without antecedent publication of panel decision); Fisher v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, 827 So.2d 1096 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (en banc decision released without antecedent publication of panel decision); Brooks v. State, 816 So.2d 199 (......
  • Childers v. State
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 28, 2006
    ...So.2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (en banc decision released without antecedent publication of panel decision); Fisher v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, 827 So.2d 1096 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (en banc decision released without antecedent publication of panel decision); Brooks v. State, 816 So.2d 199 (......
  • Re-Employment Services, Ltd. v. Nlac
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 16, 2007
    ...which permits review of non-final orders that determine the jurisdiction of a person. See Fisher v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, 827 So.2d 1096, 1097 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Gaspar, Inc. v. Naples Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 546 So.2d 764, 765 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Our standard of review is de novo.......
  • Green v. Jorgensen
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • March 10, 2011
    ...Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(i) to review non-final orders that determine personal jurisdiction. See Fisher v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, 827 So.2d 1096, 1097 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). At issue here is section 48.031(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2008), which allows for substitute service by “leaving th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 books & journal articles
  • Review of nonfinal orders - an exception to the requirement of finality.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 82 No. 3, March 2008
    • March 1, 2008
    ...inspection in connection with an election contest). (30) Fla. R. app. p. 9.130(a)(3)(c)(i). (31) Fisher v. Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n, 827 So. 2d 1096, 1097 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. (32) Compare Chapman v. Sheffield, 750 So. 2d 140, 142 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. 2000), with Thomas v. Silvers, 748 So. 2d 263......
  • Seeking appellate review - how to perfect your appeal.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 81 No. 4, April 2007
    • April 1, 2007
    ...776 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 4th D.C.A. 2000). (18) FLA. R. APP. P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(i). See Fisher v. International Longshoremen's Assoc., 827 So. 2d 1096 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. 2002) (explaining the types of orders that qualify for review under this (19) FLA. R. APP. P. 9.130(a)(3)(C)(ii). (20) FLA. R. A......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT