HINSHAW v. WACHOVIA BANK (2006)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Fifth District.

Wallace B. HINSHAW, Jr., Appellant, v. WACHOVIA BANK, N.A., f/k/a First Union National Bank, Appellee.

No. 5D05-785.

Decided: August 04, 2006

Sharon Lee Stedman, Orlando, for Appellant. John H. Pelzer and Stephen M. Teplin of Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for Appellee.

Given the absence of a timely challenge to the arbitration award or presentation of a viable issue to the trial court which had not been submitted to arbitration, the trial court was correct in confirming the arbitration award and entering final judgment in favor of Wachovia. §§ 682.12, 682.13, 682.15, Fla. Stat. See A-1 Roofing v. Select Contracting, Inc., 865 So.2d 601 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004). See also Meade v. Lumbermen's Mutual Cas. Co., 423 So.2d 908 (Fla.1982).

Hinshaw also challenges the separate, post-judgment order awarding Wachovia attorney's fees and costs. However, Hinshaw's failure to direct a timely notice of appeal to this final, distinct order precludes appellate review. See Mendoza v. Mendoza, 842 So.2d 1020 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); Miller v. Nassofer, 484 So.2d 619 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). See also Bove v. Ocwen Financial Corp., 763 So.2d 347 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

AFFIRMED.

PLEUS, C.J.

GRIFFIN and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

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Out of date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