Eric Josey v. Flagler County Board of County Commissioners, School Board of Flagler County, Flagler County Sheriff's Office and City Commission of the City of Bunnell
Eric Josey v. Flagler County Board of County Commissioners, School Board of Flagler County, Flagler County Sheriff's Office and City Commission of the City of Bunnell
SHERIFF’S OFFICE and CITYCOMMISSION of the CITY of
BUNNELL,
Appellees.
On appeal from the Circuit Court for Flagler County.Christopher Anthony France, Judge.Eric Josey, Palm Coast, pro se.Sean S. Moylan, of Flagler County Attorney’s Office, Bunnell, forAppellee, Flagler County Board of County Commissioners.David Delaney, of Weiss Serota Helfman Cole & Bierman, P.L.,Gainesville, for Appellee, School Board of Flagler County.John LeMaster, of Flagler County Sheriff’s Office, Bunnell, forAppellee, Flagler County Sheriff’s Office.
Original opinion page 2
2Paul R. Waters, of Vose Law Firm, LLP, Winter Park, forAppellee, City Commission of the City of Bunnell.April 25, 2025HARRIS, J.Appellant, Eric Josey, pro se, appeals the trial court’s ordergrantingAppellees’,FlaglerCountyBoardofCountyCommissioners (“County”), School Board of Flagler County(“School Board”), Flagler County Sheriff, and City Commission ofthe City of Bunnell (“City”), joint motion to dismiss Appellant’scomplaint for declaratory and injunctive relief on the basis thatAppellant lacked standing and failed to state a cause of action.Upon review, we note that the appealed order merelygranted the motion to dismiss rather than actually dismiss thecomplaint, and did not indicate whether dismissal was with orwithout prejudice. See Touchton v. Woodside Credit, LLC, 316 So.3d 392, 394 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (“Where an order merely grants amotion to dismiss, it is not a final order.”); GMI, LLC v. Asociaciondel Futbol Argentino, 174 So. 3d 500, 501 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)(noting order that merely grants motion to dismiss is not finalorder even if order grants motion with prejudice); Rollins Fruit Co.,Inc. v. Wilson, 923 So. 2d 516, 520 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (“The trialcourt did not take the additional step of entering a final judgmentin favor of the defendants.”). The order does not containunequivocal language of finality or whether the court found thereis no possible way to amend the complaint to state a cause of actionor establish standing, warranting dismissal with prejudice. SeeHinote v. Ford Motor Co., 958 So. 2d 1009, 1010 (Fla. 1st DCA2007); Hoffman v. Hall, 817 So. 2d 1057, 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)(“The traditional test for finality is whether the decree disposes ofthe cause on its merits leaving no questions open for judicialdetermination except for execution and enforcement of the decreeif necessary.”).Accordingly, in the absence of a final appealable order, welack jurisdiction and dismiss the appeal.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
EDWARDS, C.J., and SOUD, J., concur.
Not final until disposition of any timely andauthorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or9.331.
Opinion text and original PDF from Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal · Source opinion