John A. Bodziak v. Ddb Real Estate Investments, LLC
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledApril 15, 2020
Docket2D18-4787
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
IN THE SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, LAKELAND, FLORIDA
April 15, 2020
JOHN A. BODZIAK, FRED B. )
BULLARD, JR., and ULMERTON )
ENTERPRISES, INC., )
)
Appellants, )
)
v. ) Case No. 2D18-4787
)
DDB REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS, )
LLC., a Florida limited liability company; )
BERMER-BJURQUIST, INC., a Florida )
corporation; TIMOTHY C. DAILY; )
CHRISTIAN DAILY; and CRAIG )
BJURQUIST, )
)
Appellees. )
________________________________ )
BY ORDER OF THE COURT:
Appellants' motion for clarification is granted. The prior opinion dated February
28, 2020, is withdrawn, and the attached opinion is issued in its place. No further
motions for rehearing will be entertained.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THE FOREGOING IS A
TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL COURT ORDER.
MARY ELIZABETH KUENZEL, CLERK
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
JOHN A. BODZIAK, FRED B. )
BULLARD, JR., and ULMERTON )
ENTERPRISES, INC., )
)
Appellants, )
)
v. ) Case No. 2D18-4787
)
DDB REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS, )
LLC., a Florida limited liability company; )
BERMER-BJURQUIST, INC., a Florida )
corporation; TIMOTHY C. DAILY; )
CHRISTIAN DAILY; and CRAIG )
BJURQUIST, )
)
Appellees. )
________________________________ )
Opinion filed April 15, 2020.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas
County; Jack R. St. Arnold and Thane
Covert, Judges.
Donald J. Schutz, St. Petersburg, for
Appellants.
Charles A. Samarkos and Sharon E.
Krick of Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel
& Burns, LLP, Clearwater, for Appellee
Timothy C. Daily.
No appearance for remaining Appellees.
-2-
PER CURIAM.
Appellants John Bodziak, Fred Bullard, and Ulmerton Enterprises, Inc.,
appeal the dismissal of their counterclaims against appellee Timothy Daily. We affirm
the dismissal of the claims against Daily. Although the other appellees were also
named in the dismissed counts, the dismissal order is not final or appealable as to them
because they are named in interrelated claims that remain pending in the circuit court.
We express no view regarding the correctness of the dismissal as to those parties, and
our disposition today has no bearing on the viability of any claims that remain pending.
Affirmed.
NORTHCUTT, CASANUEVA, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
-3-