CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, A MUNICIPALITY, PETITIONER,
v.
MIAMI BEACH FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, WILLIAM NICHOLS LODGE NO. 8, 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.
A subsequently filed state court action should ordinarily be stayed pending disposition of a prior federal action between the same parties on the same issues.
Petitioner, City of Miami Beach, sought a stay of a state court action pending resolution of a prior federal action involving the same subject matter.…
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 Stay Of Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, City of Miami Beach, seeks a writ of certiorari to review an order denying its motion to stay the state court action pending the disposition of a prior action involving the same subject matter in federal court. We grant the petition.
It is well established that when a previously filed federal action is pending between the same parties or privies on the same issues, a subsequently filed state court action ordinarily should be stayed until the determination of the federal action. Wade v. Clower, 94 Fla. 817, 114 So. 548 (1927); National American Insurance Company v. Charlotte County, 611 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); State v. Harbour Island, Inc., 601 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Koehlke Components, Inc. v. South East Connectors, Inc., 456 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Schwartz v. DeLoack, 453 So. 2d 454 (Fla.2d DCA 1984).
Although the trial court has the discretion to deny a stay where the need for state-federal comity is outweighed by factors such as the congestion of the federal court docket, see ITT-Community Development Corp. v. Halifax Paving, Inc., 350 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), cert, denied, 359 So. 2d 1215 (Fla.1978), there are no factors present in this case. Indeed, since it was the respondent which first commenced the action in the federal court, it accepted the risk of any delay in reaching the trial of civil actions there. Koehlke Components, Inc. v. South East Connectors, Inc., 456 So. 2d at 555. Furthermore, the principles of res judicata and collateral estoppel would bar further litigation over these issues in state court. See Hochstadt v. Orange Broadcast, 588 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the circuit court’s order denying petitioner’s motion to stay, and remand with directions to stay the state court action pending final disposition of the federal complaint.
Certiorari granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Corinne Oviedo v. Ventura Music Grp., 797 So. 2d 634 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)…is pending between the same parties or privies on the same issues, a subsequently filed state court action ordinarily should be stayed until the determination of the federal action.” See City of Miami Beach v. Miami Beach Fraternal Order of Police, 619 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). In this case, the record reflects that the subject matter at issue, as well as the parties, are the same in both the state action as in the federal action. Additionally, the stay order before us contains no reasons in support o…
Authorities Cited
- Neill G. Wade v. Clower, 94 Fla. 817 (Fla. 1927)
- Schwartz v. DeLOACH, 453 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Craft v. State of Fla. ex rel. Richard S. King & Patrici K. King, 350 So. 2d 116 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- A.M. Hochstadt v. Orange Broadcast, 588 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Koehlke Components, Inc. v. S. E. Connectors, Inc., 456 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- State v. Harbour Island, Inc., 601 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Nat'l Am. Ins. Co. v. Charlotte Cnty. & Gilarde Env't of Fla., Inc., 611 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)