AMERISURE INSURANCE COMPANY v. JOHNSON-GRAHAM-MALONE, INC., 66 So.3d 415 (2011)
Court: Court of Appeals of Florida
Number: inflco20110809205
Visitors: 30
Filed: Aug. 09, 2011
Latest Update: Aug. 09, 2011
Summary: PER CURIAM. Upon consideration of the appellant's response to the Court's order of June 16, 2011, the Court has determined that the order on appeal does not fall within the scope of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(m). See Mercury Ins. Co. of Florida v. Markham, 938 So.2d 607 , 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The appellee's Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction and Motion for Attorneys' Fees & Costs, both filed on June 22, 2011, are denied.
Summary: PER CURIAM. Upon consideration of the appellant's response to the Court's order of June 16, 2011, the Court has determined that the order on appeal does not fall within the scope of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(m). See Mercury Ins. Co. of Florida v. Markham, 938 So.2d 607 , 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The appellee's Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction and Motion for Attorneys' Fees & Costs, both filed on June 22, 2011, are denied. ..
More
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the appellant's response to the Court's order of June 16, 2011, the Court has determined that the order on appeal does not fall within the scope of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(m). See Mercury Ins. Co. of Florida v. Markham, 938 So.2d 607, 609 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The appellee's Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Lack of Jurisdiction and Motion for Attorneys' Fees & Costs, both filed on June 22, 2011, are denied.
WOLF, DAVIS, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.
Source: Leagle
