Legal Opinion

Pauls v. Blank

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 17, 2009No. 1D09-1232PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.

Upon consideration of Appellant’s response to the court’s order of March 24, 2009, the court has determined that Counts I and II of the Third Amended Complaint seeking declaratory and in-junctive relief related to the easement, and Counts III and IV seeking damages for interference with the same easement, are inextricably intertwined. See Jensen v. Whetstine, 985 So.2d 1218, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (“Piecemeal appeals will not be permitted where claims are interrelated and involve the same transaction and the same parties remain in the suit.”) (quoting S.L.T. Warehouse Co. v. Webb, 304 So.2d…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. SLT Warehouse Company v. WebbSupreme Court of Florida · 1974
  2. Jensen v. WhetstineDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Workmen's Auto Insurance Co. v. FranzDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API