Peavy v. Parrish, 79-1377
| Decision Date | 04 June 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 79-1377,79-1377 |
| Citation | 385 So.2d 1034 |
| Parties | Otis R. PEAVY, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Martha L. Peavy, Deceased, and Otis R. Peavy, Individually, Appellant, v. Reed PARRISH and Wayne Parrish, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Cecil T. Farrington of Farrington & Farrington, Fort Lauderdale, and Davis, Browning & Hardee, Madison, for appellant.
Michael G. Widoff of Widoff & Cohn, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.
Appellees filed a claim against the estate of their deceased mother in probate proceedings in Broward County, Florida. The surviving spouse of the decedent, as personal representative of the estate, filed an objection to the claim.
A complaint was then filed in the Circuit Court in Broward County seeking to enforce an alleged oral promise of the decedent. One form of relief sought was the imposition of a constructive trust on decedent's real estate located in Broward County.
Appellant countered with motions to transfer venue and to dismiss the complaint. The motions were denied and this appeal followed.
The motion to dismiss asserted failure of the complaint to state a cause of action. An order denying such a motion is a non-final order. The applicable rule, Rule 9.130, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, does not permit an appeal of such an order. E. E. Dean Snavely, Inc. v. Weatherking, Incorporated, 359 So.2d 35 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).
The motion to transfer venue asserts that suit must be brought in the county of appellant's residence. Venue of the probate proceedings was properly laid in the county of decedent's last residence, Broward County. § 733.101, Fla.Stat. (1979). However, the statutory provision under which appellees filed this independent action does not refer to venue. § 733.705(3) Fla.Stat. (1979). Therefore, the general venue statute applies. § 47.011 Fla.Stat. (1979).
Plaintiffs, appellees here, have certain limited options in selecting venue. Their election controls, unless venue will not lie in that place. Florida Forms, Inc. v. Barkett Computer Services, Inc., 311 So.2d 730 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). The complaint seeks to impose a constructive trust on decedent's condominium. This real property is located in Broward County. The venue statute clearly permits plaintiff-appellee to select that county for venue purposes. Appellant has therefore failed to show either that venue will not lie in Broward County or that venue...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
BANCO INVERSION v. Celtic Finance Corp.
...order, as to the HVB claim, is not an appealable non-final order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130. Peavy v. Parrish, 385 So.2d 1034, 1035 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). HVB also asserts that the trial court should have stayed the claim for tortious interference against HVB. The trial c......
-
Dauer v. Freed
...So.2d 859 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (same); Habelow v. Travelers Insurance Co., 389 So.2d 218 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (same); Peavy v. Parrish, 385 So.2d 1034 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (same); Vanco Construction, Inc. v. Nucor Corporation, 378 So.2d 116 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980) (order denying defendant's motion......
-
Banco Inversion v. Celtic Finance Corporation, Case No. 4D03-3382 (FL 3/9/2005)
...order, as to the HVB claim, is not an appealable non-final order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130. Peavy v. Parrish, 385 So. 2d 1034, 1035 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). HVB also asserts that the trial court should have stayed the claim for tortious interference against HVB. The trial ......
-
Seigle v. Barry
...not properly appealable until after final judgment. Habelow v. Travelers Ins. Co., 389 So.2d 218 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Peavy v. Parrish, 385 So.2d 1034 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). See Rule 9.130, Florida Rules of Appellate This action was commenced to enforce certain rights under Florida's Public R......