Opinion · District Court of Appeal of Florida
Snelson v. Snelson
440 So. 2d 477
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- District Court of Appeal of Florida
- Jurisdiction
- Florida
- Date
- 1983-11-03
- Topic
- litigation
holding that an appellant’s as sertion that he did not have timely notice of the entry of an appealable order does not extend the jurisdictional time limit for appeal | holding that where no notice of entry of order was given to parties, relief is through rule 1.540(b) motion filed in trial court coupled with request for entry of new order | explaining that relief may be sought in the trial court | dismissing an untimely appeal without prejudice to the appellant filing a motion in the trial court under rule 1.540(b | 1.540(b) motion is remedy where party claims order was not received in time to appeal | although lack of notice of entry of trial court’s order did not extend jurisdictional time limit for appeal, dismissal of appeal was without prejudice to motion under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) to set aside order and request that new ap-pealable order be entered
Citator
- Cited by
- 70 opinions
Alfred Francis SNELSON, Appellant,
v.
Mary A. SNELSON, Appellee.
No. 83-1345.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
November 3, 1983.John T. McKnight, Brunswick, Ga., for appellant.
W.B. Hunter, Tavares, for appellee.
ON MOTION TO DISMISS
ORFINGER, Chief Judge.
The notice of appeal was filed more than thirty days following rendition of the order appealed from, so we are without jurisdiction and the appeal is dismissed.
Appellant's assertion that he was not furnished a copy of the order and thus did not have timely notice of its entry does not extend the jurisdictional time limit for appeal. Relief may be sought in the trial court by motion under Fla.R.C.P. 1.540(b) to set aside the order where no notice of its entry was given the parties, coupled with a request that a new order be entered so that the right of appeal is preserved. See Gibson v. Buice, 381 So.2d 349 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Woldarsky v. Woldarsky, 243 So.2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
DAUKSCH and FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., JJ., concur.