HYDE
v.
PEACOCK
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.
Tristan Michael Hyde petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel JD Peacock II to produce a lower tribunal order. The First District Court of Appeal dismissed the petition as moot because Hyde had already obtained a copy of the order he sought to compel.
The petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed as moot because the petitioner has already obtained the relief sought (a copy of the lower tribunal order), rendering the requested writ unnecessary.
“Since Petitioner has provided a copy of the lower tribunal order that Petitioner sought to compel, the Court dismisses the petition for writ of mandamus as moot.”
States the holding and reasoning for dismissal—that obtaining the relief sought renders the petition moot
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHyde filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel production of a lower tribunal order from Peacock. Before the appellate court ruled on th…
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 Petition For Writ Of Mandamus cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA
TRISTAN MICHAEL HYDE, Petitioner,
V.
JD PEACOCK II, Respondent.
No. 1D2024-0232
Petition for Writ of Mandamus—Original Jurisdiction.
July 24, 2024
PER CURIAM.
Since Petitioner has provided a copy of the lower tribunal order that Petitioner sought to compel, the Court dismisses the petition for writ of mandamus as moot. See *Granville v. State*, 382 So. 3d 792, 793 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024) (dismissing petition for writ of mandamus as moot).
The Court denies all pending motions as moot, in light of the foregoing.
B.L. THOMAS, RAY, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur. Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
Tristan Michael Hyde, pro se, Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent.
2