SEAN WEBKING, FATHER
v.
EMILY WEBKING, MOTHER
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 appellate court granted a petition for a writ of prohibition, quashing a lower court's order. The lower court had ruled on a motion regarding child mental health treatment despite a stay imposed by the appellate court, thus acting without jurisdiction.
No, the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to rule on the motion because it acted in violation of the stay imposed by the appellate court. Therefore, the appellate court granted the petition and quashed the order.
[1] A lower tribunal acts without jurisdiction when it rules on a motion in violation of a stay imposed by an appellate court, and a writ of prohibition is the appropriate re…
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 intelligence“As the circuit court lacked jurisdiction, we grant the petition and quash the order.”
Establishes the court's decision and the primary reason for it.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe petitioner sought a writ of prohibition to quash a circuit court order that allowed either parent to obtain mental health treatment for their mino…
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 Shared Parental Responsibility cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner seeks a writ of prohibition to quash the circuit court’s ruling on Respondent’s motion to prohibit either party from obtaining mental health treatment for their minor child without the other party’s consent. As the circuit court lacked jurisdiction, we grant the petition and quash the order. Our previous case 1D21-2971 involved a petition for writ of certiorari filed by the Petitioner. See Webking v. Webking, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D622, 2022 WL 698026 (Fla. 1st DCA Mar. 9, 2022). There, Petitioner sought to prevent certain discovery in an ongoing dissolution of marriage action between the parties. On October 1, 2021, we issued an order in case 1D21-2971 which stayed most of the proceedings before the circuit court in the dissolution of marriage case. Nonetheless, at a previously scheduled hearing on October 4, 2021, the circuit court considered the Respondent’s motion and ruled on it. In granting the motion, the circuit court acted beyond what was permitted by the stay imposed by this court and therefore acted without jurisdiction. See Stokes v. Jones, 317 So. 3d 262, 263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (granting petition for writ of prohibition and quashing discovery order where lower tribunal lacked jurisdiction because appellate court issued a show cause order in a separate prohibition case that stayed proceedings below); see also Plavnicky v. Deluicia, 954 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).
As a result, we GRANT the petition for writ of prohibition and QUASH the challenged order. BILBREY and LONG, JJ., concur; WINOKUR, J., concurs with opinion.