Case Name: James B. McDONOUGH, Jr., as the Administrator C.T.A.D.B.N. of the Estate of C. A. Rudisill, deceased, Appellant, v. Clara B. HALL et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1970-09-16
Citations: 241 So. 2d 201
Docket Number: Nos. 69-658, 69-659
Parties: James B. McDONOUGH, Jr., as the Administrator C.T.A.D.B.N. of the Estate of C. A. Rudisill, deceased, Appellant, v. Clara B. HALL et al., Appellees.
Judges: HOBSON, C. J., and PIERCE and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 241
Pages: 201–201

Head Matter:
James B. McDONOUGH, Jr., as the Administrator C.T.A.D.B.N. of the Estate of C. A. Rudisill, deceased, Appellant, v. Clara B. HALL et al., Appellees.
Nos. 69-658, 69-659.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Sept. 16, 1970.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 11, 1970.
James B. McDonough, Jr. and John A. Curtiss, of Macfarlane, Ferguson, Allison & Kelly, Tampa, for appellant.
Carlton, Fields, Ward, Emmanuel, Smith & Cutler, P. A., Tampa, for appellees.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This court previously ruled in this case that appellant's counterclaim against appel-lee-Hall individually, must be dismissed. Pursuant to our mandate the trial court properly dismissed the counterclaim. Appellant then sought, by motion, to have the trial court docket his counterclaim as a separate and independent action against ap-pellee-Hall, individually, and now appeals the trial court's denial of this motion. We affirm.
Nothing herein, of course, nor in our pri- or decision is to be taken as res judicata on the merits of any claim appellant may have against appellee-Hall, individually, nor is appellant precluded from proceeding as he may be advised in a new, separate and independent action.
Affirmed.
HOBSON, C. J., and PIERCE and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.
. Hall v. McDonough (Fla.App.2d 1968), 216 So.2d 84.