Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corp. v. Aerospace Industries, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Lidsky Vaccaro & Montes, PA v. Morejon (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
- In re C.T.D. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
- Kreager v. Glickman (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
- Piper Aircraft Co. v. Whyham (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
- Danford v. City of Rockledge (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Appellant, a sub-subcontractor on a construction project, brought this action for a
We are unable to consider the merits of the question presented. The “order” from which the appeal has been taken is one which at best merely granted the motion to dismiss and is not one which has the requisite finality to sustain a full appeal under Rule 3.2, F.A.R., 32 F.S.A., Shotkin v. Deehl, Fla.App.1963, 148 So.2d 538; Baker v. Colley, Fla.App.1958, 104 So.2d 473, nor is the order of such a nature that we could treat the present appeal as an interlocutory appeal under Rule 4.2, F.A.R. as we did in Pompano Paint Co. v. Pompano Beach Bank & Trust Co., Fla.App.1968, 208 So.2d 152.
Appeal dismissed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.