Case ID: so2d_807/html/0778-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

T & R CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a/k/a C. Taylor Construction, Inc., and Charles Taylor, Individually, Appellants, v. W. Wallace BENTLEY, Sr., and Helen M. Bentley, Husband and Wife; John E. Hawkins and Eleanor B. Hawkins, Husband and Wife, William D. Piotrowski and Cynthia M. Piotrowski, Husband and Wife; Marielle Kantzler, a Single Woman; Larry E. Smith and Peggy Smith, Husband and Wife; Jeff F. Arnold and Susan F. Arnold, Husband and Wife; Individually and On Behalf of Others similarly situated, City of Tallahassee, a Florida Municipality; Florida Power Corporation, a Florida Public Utility; Progress Telecommunications Corporation, a Florida Corporation; and Interstate Fibernet, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Appellees.
    No. 1D01-5141.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    Feb. 21, 2002.
    
      Andrew Prince Brigham and Bruce B. Humphrey of Brigham Moore, Jacksonville, for Appellants.
    Diane D. Tremor and Chris H. Bentley of Rose, Sundstrom & Bentley, Tallahassee; Martin D. Schwebel, Maitland; James A. Fowler and Carole Joy Barice of Fowler, Barice, Feeney & O’Quinn, Orlando; Jimmy Hatcher, Bristol; Luis A. Perez of Amejda & McFarland, Miami; Kent L. Hipp of Gray, Harris & Robinson, Orlando; Barbara Wilhite, Chief Assistant County Attorney, Pasco County, New Port Richey; Milton A. Galbraith, Jr., Assistant City Attorney, City of St. Petersburg; Jane Hayman, Assistant City Attorney, City of Clearwater; Jon E. Tileston of Moran, Tileston & Simon, Tampa; William H. Hughes, III, of Pennington, Moore, Wilkinson, Bell & Dunbar, Tallahassee; Sylvia Walbolt and Robert Pass of Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel & Smith, Tallahassee; Guyte P. McCord, III, of McCord, Bubsey, Ketchum and Donohue, Tallahassee; and Larry E. Levy and Loren E. Levy of The Levy Law Firm, Tallahassee, for Appellees.
   PER CURIAM.

Having considered the appellants’ response to the Court’s order of December 31, 2001, and the Court having determined that the notice of appeal was not timely filed, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The appellants’ Motion for Consideration of Notice as Timely, filed on December 31, 2001, is denied as moot.

WEBSTER, BENTON, and POLSTON, JJ., concur.