STEPHEN MCNEIL, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Nathanson v. Rishyko, 140 So. 3d 1054 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
  …ting her in contempt of court because the evidence failed to support a finding that her conduct was intentional. Here, the final judgment “contains no purge provisions because it imposes no sanctions to be avoided.” Stramaglia v. Marubeni Am. Corp., 561 So. 2d 433, 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Further, the trial court reserved jurisdiction on the issue of sanctions, and thus “the judicial labor has not ended on the contempt issue.” Id. Accordingly, this court is without jurisdiction to review the order on contemp…
• Sell v. Sell, 820 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
  …respect to the contempt issue which is the issue Sell argues in the instant proceédings, and 2) it sets the hearing for sanctions for an unspecified later date and contemplates further action by the trial court. See Stramaglia v. Marubeni Am. Corp., 561 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Crane v. Crane, 559 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); see also Winkelman v. Toll, 632 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). Finally, we conclude that the order is not appropriate for certiorari review because there is an adequate remedy…

Authorities Cited

• Haliburton v. State, 561 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 1990)
• Buford v. State, 492 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 1986)