Case Name: Jack MASSENGALE, Appellant, v. Michael D. RAY, et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-01-10
Citations: 665 So. 2d 1152
Docket Number: No. 94-2911
Parties: Jack MASSENGALE, Appellant, v. Michael D. RAY, et al., Appellees.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and GODERICH, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 665
Pages: 1152–1152

Head Matter:
Jack MASSENGALE, Appellant, v. Michael D. RAY, et al., Appellees.
No. 94-2911.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Jan. 10, 1996.
Jack Massengale, in pro per.
Neil D. Kolner, Miami, for appellee Michael D. Ray.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and GODERICH, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Because Ray's third-party complaint did not allege a claim for either indemnification, subrogation or contribution, the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, we reverse. See Rupp v. Philpot, 619 So.2d 1047 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993).