MELISSA SKEEN, APPELLANT,
v.
JOSEPH P. D'ALESSANDRO, AS DULY ELECTED STATE ATTORNEY IN AND FOR THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Melissa Skeen sought mandamus to compel production of a five-page investigative report she believed was a public record held by the State Attorney. The court affirmed discharge of the alternative writ, finding that even if the document once existed, there was no evidence it was available at the time of the hearing, making the writ futile.
The court affirmed discharge of the writ because mandamus will not issue when compliance would be futile or unavailing. Since there was no evidence that the five-page document existed at the time of the hearing, a writ ordering its production would be without beneficial results.
[1] A writ of mandamus will not be granted if its issuance would be futile, unavailing, or without beneficial results.
[2] A diligent and good faith search for a document, even if unsuccessful, can be a sufficient defense to a petition for writ of mandamus seeking its production.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“[T]he writ [of mandamus] will never be granted in cases when, if issued, it would prove unavailing, or when compliance with it would be nugatory in its effects, or would be without beneficial results and fruitless to the relator.”
Establishes the governing principle that mandamus will not issue when it would be futile or produce no beneficial result.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSkeen requested personnel and other public records from her former employer, State Attorney D'Alessandro. A two-page report on a 1990 investigation wa…
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 Public Records Request cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Melissa Skeen appeals the trial court’s order discharging an alternative writ of manda mus. Because the issuance of the writ would be futile, we affirm.
Skeen made a public records request for personnel and other records maintained by her former employer, State Attorney Joseph D’Alessandro. After receiving some documents, Skeen sought a five-page report concerning an investigation conducted in 1990. The five-page report was not produced, but a two-page report on the same investigation was released. Skeen filed a petition for mandamus, asserting that the five-page document was a public record under chapter 119, Florida Statutes (1993). The trial court issued an alternative writ, requiring D’Alessandro to produce the document or show cause why it could not be produced. At the hearing, D’Al-essandro testified .that a five-page report could not be located despite a diligent, good faith search and he denied ever seeing the five-page report. Skeen proffered testimony that would show the document existed at one time. • The trial court then discharged the writ, holding that the evidence showed the document was not available to be produced.
Skeen argues on appeal that the trial court erred in excluding evidence showing that the document originally existed. We agree that the trial court erred in refusing to allow Skeen to present her witnesses. The proffer shows, however, that Skeen sought to go beyond the issues relevant to a mandamus action and that Skeen had no evidence refuting D’Alessandro’s testimony that the document was not available at the time of the hearing.
“[T]he writ [of mandamus] will never be granted in cases when, if issued, it would prove unavailing, or when compliance with it would be nugatory in its effects, or would be without beneficial results and fruitless to the relator.” State ex rel. Ostroff v. Pearson, 61 So. 2d 325, 326 (Fla.1952) (citations omitted) (holding that writ will not issue when evidence showed papers no longer existed).
There was no evidence, presented or proffered, that the document sought by the mandamus petition existed at the time of the hearing. Therefore, a writ ordering its production would be unavailing. Accordingly, we affirm.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and BLUE, JJ., concur.