CHARLES DAVID HARRISON, ET UX., PETITIONERS,
v.
HYSTER COMPANY, ETC., 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.
The Court held that it should not have accepted jurisdiction when the controlling authority cited by the lower court was pending review but never had its petition for review granted.
Petitioners sought review of a district court's affirmance of dismissal of their product liability action, which was based on another case. The basis …
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 Product Liability Action cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The district court of appeal in Harrison v. Hyster Co., 502 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), affirmed the dismissal of petitioners’ product liability action upon the authority of Small v. Niagara Machine & Tool Works, 502 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). The only basis upon which it could be asserted that this Court had jurisdiction to review the Harrison decision was the rationale of Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981), in which we said:
We thus conclude that a district court of appeal per curiam opinion which cites as controlling authority a decision that is either pending review in or has been reversed by this Court continues to constitute prima facie express conflict and allows this Court to exercise its jurisdiction.
Id. at 420. Since a petition for review of Small had been filed in this Court, we accepted jurisdiction on the petition for review filed in the instant case. Subsequently, however, this Court declined to accept jurisdiction in Small and denied the petition for review. Small v. Niagara Machine & Tool Works, 511 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 1987).
The anomaly of reviewing a decision because it was decided upon the authority of another decision which was never reviewed on the merits by this Court has caused us to conclude that we should not have accepted jurisdiction of this case until it was determined to accept jurisdiction in Small. Jollie’s reference to the “controlling authority ... that is ... pending review” refers to a case in which the petition for jurisdictional review has been granted and the case is pending for disposition on the merits. Since Small never reached that status, our order accepting jurisdiction in this case was improvidently issued, and we now deny the petition for review.
It is so ordered.
McDonald, C.J., and OVERTON, EHRLICH, SHAW, BARKETT, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Torres v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr. (Duval County) (M.D. Fla. 2024)…s pending in this Court." Id. at 158. On November 9, 2012, the Florida Supreme Court dismissed Torres's case, stating: Having determined that this Court is without jurisdiction, this case is hereby dismissed. See Harrison v. Hyster Co., 515 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1987); Dodi Publishing Co. v. Editorial America, S.A., 385 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 1980). No motion for rehearing will be entertained by the Court. Id. at 160. Torres petitioned the United States Supreme Court for a writ of cert…
-
Gee v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Columbia County) (M.D. Fla. 2023)…affirm with citations to cases not pending review). Authority that is pending review “refers to a case in which the petition for jurisdictional review has been granted and the case is pending for disposition on the merits.” Harrison v. Hyster Co., 515 So. 2d 1279, 1280 (Fla. 1987). Here, the Florida Supreme Court did not have subject-matter jurisdiction over Gee’s appeal. The First DCA opinion constituted a “mere citation” per curiam affirmance and failed to expressly address a question of law. See…
-
Torres v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr. (Duval County) (M.D. Fla. 2021)…e case pending disposition of another case, State v. Adkins, 96 So. 3d 412 (Fla. 2012). Id. On November 9, 2012, the Florida Supreme Court dismissed Torres’ appeal for lack of jurisdiction and cited to two cases in support: Harrison v. Hyster Co., 515 So. 2d 1279 (Fla. 1987) and Dodi Publishing Co. v. Editorial America, S.A., 385 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 1980). Resp. Ex. S. On February 4, 2013, Torres petitioned the United States Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, Resp. Ex. T, which the Supreme Court ultimate…
Authorities Cited
- Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981)
- Small v. Niagara Mach. & Tool Works, 502 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Smith v. State, 502 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Harrison v. Hyster Co., 502 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)