Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure
RULE 9.130 PROCEEDINGS TO REVIEW NON-FINAL ORDERS AND SPECIFIED FINAL ORDERS
(1) This rule applies to appeals to the district courts of appeal of the non-final orders authorized herein and to appeals to the circuit court of non-final orders when provided by general law. Review of other non-final orders in such courts and non-final administrative action shall be by the method prescribed by rule 9.100.
(2) Appeals of non-final orders in criminal cases shall be as prescribed by rule 9.140.
(3) Appeals to the district courts of appeal of nonfinal orders are limited to those that(A) concern venue;(4) Non-final orders entered after final order on motions that suspend rendition are not reviewable; provided that orders granting motions for new trial in jury and non-jury cases are reviewable by the method prescribed in rule 9.110. Other non-final orders entered after final order on authorized motions are reviewable by the method prescribed by this rule.
(B) grant, continue, modify, deny, or dissolve injunctions, or refuse to modify or dissolve injunctions;
(C) determine(i) the jurisdiction of the person;(D) grant or deny the appointment of a receiver, and terminate or refuse to terminate a receivership.
(ii) the right to immediate possession of property, including but not limited to orders that grant, modify, dissolve or refuse to grant, modify, or dissolve writs of replevin, garnishment, or attachment;
(iii) the right to immediate monetary relief or child custody in family law matters;
(iv) the entitlement of a party to arbitration, or to an appraisal under an insurance policy;
(v) that, as a matter of law, a party is not entitled to workers' compensation immunity;
(vi) that a class should be certified;
(vii) that, as a matter of law, a party is not entitled to absolute or qualified immunity in a civil rights claim arising under federal law; or
(viii) that a governmental entity has taken action that has inordinately burdened real property within the meaning of section 70.001(6)(a), Florida Statutes;
(5) Orders entered on an authorized and timely motion for relief from judgment are reviewable by the method prescribed by this rule. Motions for rehearing directed to these orders will not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal.
(6) Orders that deny motions to certify a class may be reviewed by the method prescribed by this rule.
3 Case Citation(s)
Listed below are cases cited in the Florida Rules Decisions Reporter and other blog posts that reference RULE 9.130 PROCEEDINGS TO REVIEW NON-FINAL ORDERS AND SPECIFIED FINAL ORDERS.
In this trip and fall case, trial court ordered parties to non-binding arbitration. Arbitrator ruled in favor of the Plaintiff. Defendant did not move for trial de novo within 20 days of order and Plaintiff moved trial court for entry of final judgment pursuant to FRCP 1.820(h), which was granted by trial court. Defendant then moved for relief from Final Judgment pursuant to FRCP 1.540(b), claiming that there was excusable neglect due to attorney's failure to place reminder on firm's "tickler system." Trial court found that this was not excusable neglect and denied Defendant's motion on July 16th. Defendant moved for rehearing, which was denied. Defendant filed notice of appeal on August 25th. Appellate Court found it did not have jurisdiction as, pursuant to Rule 9.130(a)(5), motion for rehearing of motion for relief from judgment does not stay time to file for appeal. Read More
Entry of Summary Judgment order pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. Pro. 1.510, in case seeking possession of real property, by itself, is not an appealable, non-final order as set forth in Fla. R. App. Pro. 9.130(a)(3)(c)(ii) because the Summary Judgment order did not provide for the “immediate” right to possession of the property. The Trial Court reiterated that Summary Judgment is "interlocutory in character" as it does not automatically result in the entry of final judgment. Read More
Appeal of Trial Court's order granting Motion for Summary Judgment was not timely as (1) counterclaims were not adjudicated in Summary Judgment Order and (2) counterclaims were not separate and distinct from the claims disposed of on Summary Judgment. Citing Jensen v. Whetstine, 985 So.2d 1218, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). Read More
If you have a blog and want to write about a case relevant to this Rule, the TrackBack URL for this page is:
http://floridarulesofappellateprocedure.com/rules/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/10
Click here to learn about how to use Trackbacks with your blog.


