Per Curiam.
Upon consideration of Appellees Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Appellants Response in Opposition, the Court has determined that the appeal must be dismissed because the Order Granting Defendants Motion for Partial Final Judgment as to Count VIII is not an appealable partial final judgment. See Jensen v. Whetstine , 985 So.2d 1218, 1220 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (An order is not an appealable partial final order where there is a factual overlap between the pending claims and the claims resolved by the order.) Cf. Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(k). An appeal from an order dismissing a count of a complaint, where other counts against the same parties remain, is authorized only when the dismissed count arises from a separate and distinct transaction independent of the other pending, pleaded claims. Biasetti v. Palm Beach Blood Bank, Inc. , 654 So.2d 237, 238 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) ; see also Harrison v. J.P.A. Enters., L.L.C. , 51 So.3d 1217, 1219 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). Appellants complaint includes two pending counts alleging claims against the same defendant for damages stemming from the same conduct as Count VIII. Therefore, the claims are interrelated and the order on Count VIII is not independently appealable as a partial final judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(k).
The appeal is hereby DISMISSED .
Rowe, Kelsey, and Winokur, JJ., concur.