Summary
dismissing an appeal from an order that dismissed a cross-claim, where the plaintiffs interrelated claims remained pending against defendants
Summary of this case from Harrison v. J.P.A. EnterprisesOpinion
No. 86-1894.
November 7, 1986.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Pinellas County, Robert E. Beach, J.
Jeffrey R. Fuller of Williams, Brasfield, Wertz, Fuller Lamb, P.A., St. Petersburg, for appellant.
Ted R. Manry, III, of Macfarlane, Ferguson, Allison Kelly, Tampa, for appellee Enterprise Bldg. Corp.
ON MOTION TO DISMISS
Appellant, who was a defendant below, appeals the dismissal of his cross-claim for indemnity against appellee, a codefendant. Since the substance of the cross-claim arises out of the same circumstances underlying the plaintiff's action which is still pending, the appeal from the dismissal of the cross-claim is premature. Miami-Dade Water Sewer v. Metropolitan Dade County, 469 So.2d 813 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), petition for review denied, 482 So.2d 349 (Fla. 1986); Duffy v. Realty Growth Investors, 466 So.2d 257 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). We distinguish City of St. Petersburg v. Circuit Court, 422 So.2d 18 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), because that case involved the appealability of a dismissal of the plaintiff's primary complaint at a time when a cross-claim was still pending.
We dismiss the appeal without prejudice to raise the issues upon plenary appeal from the final judgment.
SCHOONOVER and HALL, JJ., concur.