Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1978

In re the Estate of Zaloudek

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided April 4, 1978 · Alderman, Dauksch, Moore

356 So. 2d 1326; 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15267 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

In re Estate of Bierman (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Howard v. Baumer (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

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

DAUKSCH, Judge.

Appellants bring for our review an order of the trial court which quashed a subpoena duces tecum. They have designated their appeal as being an interlocutory appeal and we recognize it as such. We derive our authority for interlocutory review from Fla. *1327App. Rule 4.2. In this probate matter Fla. Probate and Guardianship Rule 5.100 also defines the right of appeal. In neither rule does a party have the right to interlocutory appeal from a non-final order in a probate action. In re Estate of Baker, 327 So.2d 205 (Fla. 1976); Tyler v. Huggins, 175 So.2d 239 (Fla. 2 DCA 1965); In re Estate of Leterman, 238 So.2d 695 (Fla. 3 DCA 1970); Johnson v. General Motors Corp., 350 So.2d 1119 (Fla. 4 DCA 1977).

Appeal DISMISSED.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and MOORE, J., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.