Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Constance Buchanan, as Legal Guardian of John Doe, a fictitious name for a minor v. Crossroads United Methodist Church, Inc., a Florida Non-Profit Corporation, Campus Crusade for Christ, Inc., and Christopher Robert Bacca, 18-1821 (2018)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 18-1821 Visitors: 11
Filed: Jun. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _ No. 1D18-1821 _ CONSTANCE BUCHANAN, as legal guardian of John Doe, a fictitious name for a minor, Appellant, v. CROSSROADS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, INC., a Florida Non-Profit Corporation, CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST, INC., and CHRISTOPHER ROBERT BACCA, Appellees. _ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Robert M. Dees, Judge. June 20, 2018 PER CURIAM. Upon consideration of Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Appellant’s Response in
More
         FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                STATE OF FLORIDA
                 _____________________________

                         No. 1D18-1821
                 _____________________________

CONSTANCE BUCHANAN, as legal
guardian of John Doe, a
fictitious name for a minor,

    Appellant,

    v.

CROSSROADS UNITED
METHODIST CHURCH, INC., a
Florida Non-Profit Corporation,
CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST,
INC., and CHRISTOPHER ROBERT
BACCA,

    Appellees.
                 _____________________________


On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
Robert M. Dees, Judge.

                         June 20, 2018


PER CURIAM.

     Upon consideration of Appellee’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal
and Appellant’s Response in Opposition, the Court has
determined that the appeal must be dismissed because the
“Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Partial Final Judgment
as to Count VIII” is not an appealable partial final judgment. See
Jensen v. Whetstine, 
985 So. 2d 1218
, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
(“An order is not an appealable partial final order where there is
a factual overlap between the pending claims and the claims
resolved by the order.”) Cf. Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(k). “An appeal
from an order dismissing a count of a complaint, where other
counts against the same parties remain, is authorized only when
the dismissed count arises from a separate and distinct
transaction independent of the other pending, pleaded claims.”
Biasetti v. Palm Beach Blood Bank, Inc., 
654 So. 2d 237
, 238 (Fla.
4th DCA 1995); see also Harrison v. J.P.A. Enters., LLC, 
51 So. 3d
1217, 1219 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). Appellant’s complaint
includes two pending counts alleging claims against the same
defendant for damages stemming from the same conduct as
Count VIII. Therefore, the claims are interrelated and the order
on Count VIII is not independently appealable as a partial final
judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure
9.110(k).

    The appeal is hereby DISMISSED.

ROWE, KELSEY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

                 _____________________________

    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
               _____________________________


Gerald B. Stewart, Jacksonville; Willie J. Walker of The Walker
Law Offices, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Michael R. D'Lugo of Wicker Smith O’Hara McCoy & Ford, P.A.,
Orlando, for Appellee Campus Crusade for Christ.

No appearance for Appellees Crossroads United Methodist
Church or Christopher Robert Bacca.




                                2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer