Case Name: William J. McANALLY, III, and Harriet C. McAnally, Appellants, v. John O. CRAIG, III, Administrator CTA DBN of the Estate of William J. McAnally, Jr., Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1992-02-26
Citations: 595 So. 2d 205
Docket Number: No. 91-2063
Parties: William J. McANALLY, III, and Harriet C. McAnally, Appellants, v. John O. CRAIG, III, Administrator CTA DBN of the Estate of William J. McAnally, Jr., Appellee.
Judges: DOWNEY and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 595
Pages: 205–205

Head Matter:
William J. McANALLY, III, and Harriet C. McAnally, Appellants, v. John O. CRAIG, III, Administrator CTA DBN of the Estate of William J. McAnally, Jr., Appellee.
No. 91-2063.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Feb. 26, 1992.
J. Patrick Knight of Cromwell, Pfaffen-berger, Dahlmeier & Griffin, North Palm Beach, for appellants.
David W. Schmidt of Simon and Schmidt, Delray Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
FASTRACK APPEAL
HERSEY, Judge.
In this action to determine entitlement to certain property in an estate, the trial court entered an order dismissing with prejudice one count of a four count complaint. The property at issue in the dismissed count is the subject of a suit which had been filed earlier in North Carolina, the domicile of the decedent. While we concur in the trial court's conclusion that the matter should be resolved in the North Carolina action where jurisdiction was first acquired, we find error in treating the dismissal as one with prejudice. While unlikely, it is possible that the North Carolina court might fail or refuse to determine entitlement to the assets in question. Thus, we find it appropriate to strike from the final judgment the "with prejudice" aspect, so that the matter may be revisited again by a Florida court should entitlement not be satisfactorily resolved elsewhere. Cf Dhondy v. Schimpeler, 528 So.2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 534 So.2d 401 (Fla.1988).
With the exception noted, we affirm the judgment appealed.
MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED.
DOWNEY and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.