UNIFIRST CORPORATION vs JOEY'S NEW YORK PIZZA LLC, D/B/A JOEY'S NEW YORK PIZZA I I LLC, D/B/A JOEY'S NEW YORK PIZZA I I I LLC

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT UNIFIRST CORPORATION, Appellant, v. JOEY'S NEW YORK PIZZA, LLC, d/b/a JOEY'S NEW YORK PIZZA I I LLC, d/b/a JOEY'S NEW YORK PIZZA I I I LLC, Appellee. No. 2D21-891 December 22, 2021 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Kimberly Sharpe Byrd, Judge. John W. Gardner of The Gardner Law Firm, Brandon, for Appellant. Shyamie Dixit and Robert L. Vessel of Dixit Law Firm, Tampa, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Unifirst Corporation appeals the trial court's order vacating an arbitration award in its favor and ordering the parties to renewed arbitration. This court lacks jurisdiction because the order on appeal is a nonfinal, nonappealable order. See Loewenstein, Inc. v. Draheim, 898 So. 2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Zabawa v. Penna, 868 So. 2d 1292, 1292 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Unifirst urges this court to treat its appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari based on Felger v. Mock, 65 So. 3d 625, 628 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011), and Heart Surgery Center v. Thomas J. Bixler II, M.D., P.A., 128 So. 3d 169, 172–73 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013). We decline to treat the appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari because Unifirst cannot demonstrate irreparable harm that cannot be remedied on direct appeal. See Miami-Dade County v. King, 176 So. 3d 373, 374 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015); Loewenstein, 898 So. 2d at 1130; Zabawa, 868 So. 2d at 1293. We certify conflict with the First District's decisions in Felger, Heart Surgery Center, and Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1579 v. City of Gainesville, 264 So. 3d 375, 377–79 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019) (reaffirming its holding in Felger and certifying conflict with King, Loewnstein, and Zabawa). Dismissed; conflict certified. SILBERMAN, LaROSE, and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur. 2 Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication. 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.