Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed February 15, 2017.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D16-928
Lower Tribunal No. 15-24559
________________
Eagle Arts Academy, Inc.,
Appellant,
vs.
Tri-City Electric Co., Inc.,
Appellee.
An appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade
County, Jose M. Rodriguez, Judge.
Weiss, Handler & Cornwell, P.A. and William J. Cornwell and Seth A.
Kolton (Boca Raton), for appellant.
Elder & Lewis, P.A. and Kerry H. Lewis and David B. Williams, for
appellee.
Before SUAREZ, C.J., and LAGOA and SALTER, JJ.
SUAREZ, C.J.
Eagle Arts Academy [“EAA”] appeals from a non-final order summarily
denying its motion to dismiss the complaint against it by Tri-County Electric
Company, Inc. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Although Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(xi) 1
authorizes appeals of non-final orders that determine, as a matter of law, that a
party is not entitled to sovereign immunity, the order on appeal makes no explicit
or implicit finding as a matter of law that EAA is not entitled to sovereign
immunity. Compare Hastings v. Demming, 694 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 1997) (holding
that a final order denying summary judgment on a claim of workers’ compensation
immunity is not appealable unless the trial court order specifically states that, as a
matter of law, such a defense is not available to a party); Taival v. Barrett, 2016
WL 3866113 (Fla. 5th DCA July 2015) (“[A]n order that simply denies the
defendant’s motion [for summary judgment], but does not determine as a matter of
law that summary judgment is improper, is not appealable.”). The order
summarily denying the motion to dismiss and requiring the defendant EAA to
answer is simply and correctly the trial court’s determination that based on the four
corners of the Complaint the matter may move forward on the allegations. See
Lewis v. Barnett Bank of S. Fla., N.A., 604 So. 2d 937, 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
(holding that on a motion to dismiss, the trial court is necessarily confined to the
well-pled facts alleged in the four corners of the complaint is not authorized to
1In re Amendments to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130, 151 So. 3d 1217
(Fla. 2014).
2
consider any other facts); Barbado v. Green & Murphy, P.A., 758 So. 2d 1173,
1174 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding a motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency
of the complaint and a court may not go beyond the four corners of the complaint
in considering the legal sufficiency of the allegations).
Dismissed.
3