Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
BLADE OF ORLANDO, LLC, Patrick Amore and Stefano Tedeschi, Appellants, v. Amelia DELSANTER and Anthony Carrino, Appellees.
Blade of Orlando, LLC, Patrick Amore, and Stefano Tedeschi (“Appellants”) appeal an order affirming as final a 2010 judgment entered in favor of Amelia Delsanter and Anthony Carrino (“Appellees”). Appellants contend that the trial court erred in its determination that the judgment was a final order disposing of all issues in the case. Appellees raise two arguments upon appeal, which we affirm without further discussion.
Appellants argue that the trial court erred in holding that the judgment was a final order. See Landing Grp. of Tampa, Inc. v. Kifner, 951 So.2d 1014, 1017 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007) (“The traditional test for ‘determining the finality of an order, judgment, or decree is whether the order in question marks the end of the judicial labor in the case, and nothing further remains to be done by the court to fully effectuate a termination of the cause ․’ ”). We agree that the judgment did not address the first count of Appellants' complaint and that several of their affirmative defenses to Appellees' counterclaim were not disproved by the record. “A court cannot grant summary judgment where a defendant asserts legally sufficient affirmative defenses that have not been rebutted.” Haven Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Kirian, 579 So.2d 730, 733 (Fla. 1991).
We further note that, following both parties' motions in a 2010 appeal of the judgment, this court relinquished jurisdiction for the trial court to amend the judgment to make it a final order. The trial court never did so. The parties then stipulated that the judgment was not final, and this court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
We therefore reverse the trial court's order finding the judgment to be final and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.
PER CURIAM.
SAWAYA, PALMER and TORPY, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Docket No: Case No. 5D17-514
Decided: August 03, 2018
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)