Case Name: Ruby C. LAURANCE, Individually as an executrix of the Estate of Jack C. Laurance, Deceased, Appellant, v. PAUL W. DAVIS SYSTEMS, INC. OF ST. PETERSBURG, and Servicemaster-Hirth Carpet and Furniture Cleaners, Inc., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1976-06-25
Citations: 334 So. 2d 126
Docket Number: No. 75-1551
Parties: Ruby C. LAURANCE, Individually as an executrix of the Estate of Jack C. Laurance, Deceased, Appellant, v. PAUL W. DAVIS SYSTEMS, INC. OF ST. PETERSBURG, and Servicemaster-Hirth Carpet and Furniture Cleaners, Inc., Appellees.
Judges: HOBSON, A. C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 334
Pages: 126–127

Head Matter:
Ruby C. LAURANCE, Individually as an executrix of the Estate of Jack C. Laurance, Deceased, Appellant, v. PAUL W. DAVIS SYSTEMS, INC. OF ST. PETERSBURG, and Servicemaster-Hirth Carpet and Furniture Cleaners, Inc., Appellees.
No. 75-1551.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
June 25, 1976.
Lewis H. Homer, III, Clearwater, for appellant.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals a final judgment foreclosing a mechanic's lien filed by Davis Systems. The appellant filed a counterclaim against Davis Systems claiming damages. Davis Systems then filed a third-party complaint against Servicemaster and the appellant followed with a crossclaim against Servicemaster. After all pleadings had been filed and all issues framed, a pre trial order was entered ordering the mechanic's lien foreclosure to proceed in a non jury trial and leaving the remaining claims to be tried at a later date before a jury as requested.
Thereafter another circuit judge tried the mechanic's lien foreclosure and entered the final judgment appealed. Appellant brought this appeal in fear that the final judgment, not having reserved jurisdiction to try the issues presented by her counterclaim and crossclaim, would preclude appellant from her day in court on those issues. No issue is raised with respect to the propriety of the entry of the foreclosure judgment prior to the disposition of the other claims.-
Therefore, we affirm the final judgment foreclosing the mechanic's lien and remand the cause for a jury trial on the remaining claims.
HOBSON, A. C. J., and GRIMES and SCHEB, JJ., concur.