The Second District Court of Appeal ruled yesterday in Gohary v. Gohary, dismissing the Former Husband’s appeal on the basis that it was untimely. While the Former Husband argued that his Motion for Rehearing tolled the time for a Notice of Appeal to be filed, the Second District Court found that, as only temporary timesharing was ordered in the Final Judgment, it did not constitute a final order. As the deadline for appealing a non-final order is not tolled by the filing of a Motion for Rehearing, the Former Husband’s appeal was not timely noticed, and was dismissed as a result.
Đăng ký:
Đăng Nhận xét (Atom)
Bài đăng phổ biến
-
Sheesh, does anyone have any news of any interest? Does it count that I saw Ervin rockin' some hard-core aviators outside the courthous... -
Here's an interesting opinion from Magistrate Judge Torres awarding defendants attorney's fees for opposing a copyright infringemen... -
I don't know, I feel like we're getting a little Frank Jimenez chronic here, and yet more news keeps breaking. Now it's this , i... -
stucomplaint I'm still on a high from last night's Bar thingy, so...
-
That old W.C. Fields line is ringing in my head, as the wind kicks up and rip tides batter the coast. I have to be honest, with the emerging... -
Federal Rule Violation If you have been charged with USCA0024 FEDERAL RULE VIOLATION you can call a Defense Attorney Tampa at 1-877-793-9290... -
11th Circuit, 11th Schmircuit, that's what I always say. And I see I'm not alone. On Friday in the closely-watched Checking Overdraf... -
The Second District Court, in Pierce v. Pierce, affirmed a finding of contempt and rejected an argument that the lower tribunal should have...
-
And invites a local attorney to federal court! You know, for civil litigators it's somewhat rare to have actual hearings with our feder... -
The Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled today in Tullier v. Tullier , affirming the lower court’s modification of timesharing for the Form...
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét