Elvis Cruz v. 5101 RE CO, LLC
In this consolidated appeal arising from a settlement-agreement dispute over the demolition of a historic Miami building, the Third DCA dismissed Cruz's appeal of a summary judgment order for lack of appellate jurisdiction because the Developer's counterclaim—based on the same facts—remained pending in the trial court and was inextricably intertwined with the adjudicated claims, rendering the order a non-appealable partial judgment under Rule 9.110(k). The court separately treated Cruz's appeal of the $136,611 attorney's fees-and-costs order as a certiorari petition, granted it, and quashed the fee order because requiring payment while interdependent factual issues remain unresolved causes irreparable harm as a matter of law.
Key facts
- Cruz was a member of a neighborhood civic association that entered into a settlement agreement with the City of Miami and Developer (5101 RE CO, LLC) concerning the redevelopment of a historic building in Miami.
- Cruz filed a complaint in 2021 alleging the City and Developer breached the settlement agreement when the Developer demolished the building under a City permit.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Holdings
- Under Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(k), a partial final judgment is reviewable on interlocutory appeal only if it disposes of a separate and distinct cause of action that is not interdependent with…
- +1 more holding with a free trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.