NORTH BEACH ASSOCIATION OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, INC. AND K. BRIAN KILLDAY, PETITIONERS,
v.
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, 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 landowner filed a petition for writ of certiorari challenging a rezoning decision affecting his property. The trial court dismissed the amended petition, claiming lack of jurisdiction to consider the additional substantive arguments. The appellate court held that petitions for extraordinary relief may be amended to include additional substantive arguments when the interests of justice are served, and remanded for further proceedings.
A petition for certiorari may be amended to include additional substantive arguments when the interests of justice are served thereby. The trial court departed from the essential requirements of law in determining that it had no jurisdiction to consider the arguments raised in the amended petition.
[1] A petition for certiorari may be amended to include additional substantive arguments when the interests of justice are served thereby.
[2] Amendments to petitions for extraordinary relief should be liberally allowed if they would not result in irremediable prejudice to the opposing party.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“A petition for certiorari may be amended to include additional substantive arguments when the interests of justice are served thereby.”
States the core holding regarding permissibility of amending certiorari petitions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner, a landowner, filed a petition for writ of certiorari to challenge the rezoning of a development project located near his property. The pet…
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 Leave Of Court cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, Judge.
Petitioner, landowner, filed a petition for writ of certiorari to challenge the rezoning of a development project which was close to his property. After petitioner amended the petition to allege additional grounds, the trial court dismissed the amended petition on the ground that the court had no jurisdiction to consider the substantive arguments that the petitioner raised in the amended petition.
A petition for certiorari may be amended to include additional substantive arguments when the interests of justice are served thereby. The 1997 committee note to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040(d) provides:
Subdivision (d) is the appellate procedure counterpart of the harmless error statute, section 59.041, Florida Statutes (1975). It incorporates the concept contained in former rule 3.2(c), which provided that deficiencies in the form or substance of a notice of appeal were not grounds for dismissal, absent a clear showing that the adversary had been misled or prejudiced. Amendments should be liberally allowed under this rule, including pleadings in the lower tribunal, if it would not result in irremediable prejudice.
This rule abrogated the dictum in Laug v. Murphy, 191 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966), cited by the trial court, to the effect that a notice of appeal cannot be amended after the expiration of the time allowed for appeal.
It is not entirely uncommon for an appellant to request to file an amended brief to raise an additional issue. We grant such motions where the appellant provides a satisfactory explanation as to why he or she did not raise the issue in the initial brief and where there is no prejudice to the opposing party. We see no reason not to extend the same reasoning to the amendment of petitions for extraordinary relief.
Because the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law in determining that it had no jurisdiction to consider the arguments raised in the amended petition, we grant the petition. Although the court also noted that the amended petition was filed without leave of court, petitioner filed a motion for leave to amend with the petition which the trial court at least tacitly granted by issuing an order to show cause requiring the county to respond to the amended petition. Therefore, the record does not support the trial court’s alternative reason for dismissal.
Thus, we grant the writ and remand for further proceedings on the amended petition.
STONE, C.J., and FARMER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cook v. City OF Winter Haven Police Dep't, 837 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…e. Fla. R.App. P. 9.040(d) (“At any time in the interest of justice, the court may permit any part of the proceeding to be amended so that it may be disposed of on the merits.”); see also N. Beach Ass’n of St. Lucie County, Inc. v. St. Lucie County, 706 So. 2d 62, 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). If amendments which include substantive changes are permissible, certainly a party should be able to amend a petition to comply with procedural rules requiring an appendix and appropriate references thereto. This is not a c…
-
Parker v. Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles, 338 So. 3d 450 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)…view both the December and February orders in a single amended petition, the latter of which certainly remedied any issues of finality that might have existed in regard to the former. Cf. N. Beach Ass'n of St. Lucie Cnty., Inc. v. St. Lucie County, 706 So. 2d 62, 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (discussing authority for granting leave to amend petitions for writ of certiorari). The circuit court, in granting that motion to strike, purportedly did not consider anything related to the new February order and, as a res…
-
Cocoplum Civic Ass'n, Inc v. City of Coral Gables (11th Cir. Ct. App. Div. 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Laug v. Murphy, 191 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)
- Alah Medley Heggie v. Leonard Bros. Transfer, Inc., 191 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)