Estela Gonzalez, Appellant, v. JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association, Appellee. (2026)

Appellant Estela Gonzalez appeals the trial court's February 14, 2025 order vacating the order on her motion for surplus. This appeal is untimely because it was filed more than 60 days after rendition of the order appealed. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b) (“Jurisdiction of the court under this rule must be invoked by filing a notice with the clerk of the lower tribunal within 30 days of rendition of the order to be reviewed[.]”). Gonzalez's attempt to piggy-back this appeal onto the appeal in related case number 25-0371 cannot succeed. The mandate in that case was issued on May 5, 2025.¹ Accordingly, we are constrained to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Dismissed.

FOOTNOTES

1.   We may appropriately take judicial notice of records in prior appeals. See Sinclair v. State, 853 So. 2d 551, 552 n.2 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (“[W]e of course may appropriately take judicial notice of the records in former appeals.”); Pacheco v. Gonzalez, 254 So. 3d 527, 533 n.5 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“An appellate court can take judicial notice of its own files and records.”). Gonzalez previously filed an appeal in this matter in case number 3D2025-0371, which was dismissed on April 9, 2025 because of her failure to comply with our orders requiring her to file a copy of the order being appealed and to certify service of the notice and orders on all parties. Gonzalez moved to reinstate that appeal and we denied without prejudice, permitting her to renew her motion to reinstate within fifteen days upon showing compliance with the prior orders. She did not comply, filed no renewed motion, and that appeal was closed on May 5, 2025.

PER CURIAM.