EUGENE LUNGER, PETITIONER,
v.
THE HONORABLE HARRY G. HINCKLEY, JR., CIRCUIT COURT JUDGE OF THE SEVENTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. 4th DCA | 1991-01-23
No. 90-3040
ANSTEAD, LETTS and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.
572 So. 2d 1042 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1991) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We sua sponte strike Betty Lunger as a named respondent.

The respondent concedes error. We grant the petition for writ of mandamus and prohibition and quash the order of the trial court on the authority of Taylor v. Taylor, 569 So. 2d 1389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Murphy v. Murphy, 558 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). See Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(c).

ANSTEAD, LETTS and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Lewis v. Swezy, 866 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
    …petition for writ of prohibition and mandamus. This court noted that a party’s consent is required before a hearing can be referred to a general master, granted the petition, and reversed the order of referral. See also Lunger v. Hinck- [*1250] ley, 572 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (following Taylor); Novartis Pharm. Corp. v. Carnoto, 798 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (citing Taylor and observing, “[mjandamus lies to compel a trial court to resolve issues without a special master when the trial court has re…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw