AUDREY DALE MCGEE, PETITIONER,
v.
WALTER T. MCGEE, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Petition for writ of certiorari dismissed as untimely filed because the underlying order was non-final and therefore a motion for rehearing did not extend the filing deadline.
A motion for rehearing does not delay the filing deadline for a writ of certiorari when filed from a non-final or interlocutory order.
[1] A motion for rehearing from a non-final or interlocutory order does not extend the 30-day deadline for filing a petition for common law writ of certiorari.
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAudrey Dale McGee filed a petition for certiorari on February 17, 1986, challenging an order denying her motion to disqualify rendered on September 21…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rendition Of Order cases and more on FLexlaw
GUNTHER, Judge.
This petition for writ of certiorari must be dismissed because it has not been filed in a timely fashion. In Florida, petitions for common law writ of certiorari must be filed within 30 days of the rendition of the order to be reviewed. Fla.R.App.P. 9.100(c). When an authorized and timely motion for rehearing has been filed, the order shall not be deemed rendered until disposition thereof. Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g). However, a motion for rehearing is not authorized to be taken from an interlocutory or non-final order, and therefore does not delay the time of filing a writ of. certiorari. Owens v. Jackson, 476 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Williams v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 468 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Hofer v. Gil De Rubio, 409 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
In the present case, the writ of certiorari was untimely because the petition for rehearing was not authorized. Therefore, the date of rendition was September 21, 1985, the date that the court denied the wife’s motion to disqualify. We do not have jurisdiction because February 17, 1986, the date that the wife filed the petition for certiorari, is not within 30 days of the date of the rendition of the order. DISMISSED.
LETTS and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Bensonhurst Drywall, Inc. v. Ledesma, 583 So. 2d 1094 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…rements of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100(c) by filing successive motions addressed to the same issue. We liken this to the filing of a motion for rehearing from a [*1095] non-final order which does not toll rendition. See McGee v. McGee, 487 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Dismissed. DELL, STONE and WARNER, JJ., concur.…
-
Dist. Sch. Bd. OF ST. Johns Cnty. v. Timoney, 524 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(g), the School Board’s motion for reconsideration in this case did not extend the time for filing the petition for writ of certiorari and therefore the petition is not premature. See Williams, supra; McGee v. McGee, 487 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Although Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(v) states that a nonfinal order determining a party’s right to arbitration is an appealable order, the order in this case does not come within the scope of that rule,…
-
R.S. Johnson v. Citizens State Bank, 518 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…rk of the court deemed to have jurisdiction” and that Rule 9.100(c) requires a petition for writ of certiorari to be filed within 30 days of the date of rendition of the order sought to be reviewed. This time limit is jurisdictional, McGee v. McGee, 487 So. 2d 412 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Accordingly, we directed the parties to address the question whether appellant had timely invoked the jurisdiction of this court.2 On consideration of the response of the appellant/petitioner3 and the reply of appel-lee/responde…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Owens v. Royce V. Jackson, M.D., 476 So. 2d 264 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Litem v. Maritz GIL DE Rubio and Ferdinand Gil De Rubio, 409 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Emil Albert Dealto v. The Honorable Richard B. Keating, 409 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Williams v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 468 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)