AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves a dispute between two law firms, Sutin, Thayer & Browne (Petitioner-Appellee) and Whitener Law Firm (Respondent-Appellant), over the division of an attorney fee, with Sutin, Thayer & Browne being awarded 45% of the fee.

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellee (Sutin, Thayer & Browne): [Not applicable or not found]
• Respondent-Appellant (Whitener Law Firm): Filed objections to the judgment, challenging both the procedural and substantive aspects of the judgment.

Legal Issues

• Whether the judgment awarding Sutin, Thayer & Browne 45% of an attorney fee is final and appealable at this time.

Disposition

• The appeal was dismissed for lack of a final order.

Reasons

• J. MILES HANISEE, Judge, with CYNTHIA A. FRY, Judge, and LINDA M. VANZI, Judge concurring, determined that the judgment in question was not final and appealable at the time of the appeal because Whitener Law Firm's objections to the judgment had not been addressed by the district court. These objections were construed as a motion to alter, amend, or reconsider the judgment, which could potentially alter, amend, or moot the judgment entered by the district court. Since the district court had not had the opportunity to address these objections, the judgment was deemed not final, rendering Whitener's appeal premature (paras 1-6).