TENZER v. GUARDIANSHIP OF TENZER (2018)

Appellant Veronica Tenzer, as natural parent and guardian of the property of her son, H.T., appeals a November 2016 final order approving a trust set up on behalf of her former husband. Appellant argues she was denied due process because she was not permitted to participate in the hearing seeking approval of the trust. We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

The record reflects that in September 2016, the circuit court entered an order striking Appellant from the trust proceeding because she was not an interested party. Appellant failed to timely appeal that order. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(h), (k) (2016). The September order striking Appellant as a party to the original trust proceeding was a final order because it removed Appellant from the action pertaining to the establishment of the trust. See, e.g., Quinones v. Se. Inv. Grp. Corp., 138 So.3d 549, 549 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014); Superior Fence & Rail of N. Fla. v. Lucas, 35 So.3d 104, 105 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (en banc); Brogdon v. Guardianship of Brogdon, 553 So.2d 299, 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). Appellant's failure to appeal the September final order is a bar to any subsequent attempt to have us address whether she was an interested party to the original proceeding and, therefore, entitled to due process. Accordingly, we dismiss her appeal.

Dismissed.

Per Curiam.

Damoorgian, Forst and Kuntz, JJ., concur.