Case Name: Marvell WOMACK, a minor, and Ethel Mae Womack, his guardian, Appellants, v. Burton F. GOLDBERG and Joyce S. Goldberg, Appeilees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1960-02-11
Citations: 117 So. 2d 758
Docket Number: No. 59-653
Parties: Marvell WOMACK, a minor, and Ethel Mae Womack, his guardian, Appellants, v. Burton F. GOLDBERG and Joyce S. Goldberg, Appeilees.
Judges: HORTON, C. J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 117
Pages: 758–761

Head Matter:
Marvell WOMACK, a minor, and Ethel Mae Womack, his guardian, Appellants, v. Burton F. GOLDBERG and Joyce S. Goldberg, Appeilees.
No. 59-653.
District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
Feb. 11, 1960.
Samuel Berger, Miami, for appellants.
Fowler, White, Gillen, Humkey & Tre-nam and Henry Burnett, Miami, for appel-lees.

Opinion:
CARROLL, CHAS., Judge.
A motion by the appellees to dismiss this appeal presents the question of whether a trial court's order is final, or is interlocutory, which, upon granting a defendant's motion to dismiss, dismisses the complaint and grants leave to the plaintiff to amend, with no amendment being filed. We hold that such an order is final and appealable.
In this case, an order was entered on September 16, 1959, as follows:
"This Cause coming on to be heard upon the defendants' motion to dismiss, and the Court having heard argument of counsel, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is
"Ordered and Adjudged that the motion be, and the same is hereby granted, and that the complaint be, and the same is hereby dismissed with leave to amend within fifteen (15) days from the date hereof."
The provision therein "that the complaint be, and the same is hereby dismissed," made the order final, even without including the customary language that "the defendant go hence without day." Schwertfeger v. Constant, Fla.App.1959, 109 So.2d 173, 175. Being otherwise final in form and content, the finality of the order was not diminished by adding the clause, "with leave to amend within fifteen (15) days from the date hereof," and, as no amendment to the complaint was filed, the rendition date of the final order and the start of the running of the 60-day period for appeal therefrom was September 16, 1959. Brenner v. Gelernter, Fla.1956, 90 So.2d 306.
The appellants, being uncertain of the finality of that common-law order, applied to the court and obtained a second order, which, dated October 20, 1959, was as follows:
"This Cause coming on to be heard upon the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, on the ground that the complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted, and the Court having heard argument of counsel, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is
"Ordered and Adjudged that the motion be, and the same is hereby granted, and the complaint be, and the same is hereby dismissed for failure to state a cause of action upon which relief can be granted, and the defendant may go hence without day, plaintiff having declined to amend."
This appeal is based on a notice of appeal filed November 2, 1959, directed only to the second order. No appeal having been taken from the first (final) order of dismissal rendered September 16, 1959, the appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal from the second order should be granted.
For the reasons stated, this above styled and numbered appeal is dismissed.
It is so ordered.
HORTON, C. J., concurs.
PEARSON, J., dissents.