Case ID: so2d_528/html/0138-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DOWNEY, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DAYTONA IMPORTS, INC., a Texas corporation, Appellant, v. Howard BLOOM and Anthony Brown, Individually, Appellees.
    No. 87-2016.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    July 20, 1988.
    Harry T. Hackney of Tripp, Scott, Conk-lin & Smith, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
    Kim Douglas Sherman of Sherman & Sherman, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee-Howard Bloom.
   DOWNEY, Judge.

Appellant seeks review of a Final Judgment Granting Possession of an automobile to appellee, pursuant to a prejudgment motion for writ of replevin.

We have considered the record presented and the various appellate presentations contained in the briefs and conclude that the trial court erred in entering a final judgment for appellee in the present posture of the case. The provisions of the replevin statute for prejudgment writ of replevin contemplate that the award of possession is made “pending final adjudication of the claims of the parties.” In other words, further proceedings are envisioned to ultimately determine all of the issues pending between the parties. Thus, the case is not ripe for final judgment at this time; further proceedings are in order.

Accordingly, the issuance of the writ of replevin pending the litigation is affirmed. However, those aspects of the judgment that purport to be final are reversed and the cause is remanded for further appropriate proceedings.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART with directions.

HERSEY, C.J., and GUNTHER, J., concur.