JACOBS v. JACOB (2024)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nava JACOBS, Appellant, v. Anita JACOB, et al., Appellees.

No. 3D23-1971

Decided: October 16, 2024

Before LINDSEY, MILLER, and GORDO, JJ.

Schlesinger Law Group, Michael J. Schlesinger, Luis E. Barreto & Associates, P.A., and Luis E. Barreto, for appellant. Rosenthal Rosenthal Rasco LLC, Eduardo I. Rasco, and Steve M. Bimston, for appellees.

Appellant challenges an order granting, in part, a motion to dismiss her second amended complaint. The order on review merely states that it is “granting, in part, defendant's motion to dismiss second amended complaint, or alternatively, for a more definite statement.” It neither contains words of finality nor enters judgment in favor of appellees. Because this is not a final order capable of review, we lack jurisdiction and therefore dismiss the appeal. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.170(b) (identifying appealable probate and guardianship orders “that finally determine a right or obligation of an interested person”) (emphasis added); Allen v. Est. of Hirshberg, 913 So. 2d 1249, 1249 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (“The mere granting of a motion to dismiss does not result in a final order or an appealable non-final order. Accordingly, the appeal from the order granting the motion to dismiss the petition to revoke probate is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.”) (citations omitted).

Appeal dismissed.

MILLER, J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network