JOSEPH S. SHOOK, PETITIONER,
v.
JACK ALTER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS FORMER TRUSTEE OF THE RUTH ALTER TRUST, FISCHLER & FRIEDMAN, P.A., HIS COUNSEL, FLEET CLEARING CORPORATION, AND GREENBERG, TRAURIG, HOFFMAN, LIPOFF, ROSEN & QUENTEL, P.A., ITS COUNSEL, RESPONDENTS

Fla. 4th DCA | 1998-08-12
No. 98-2375
POLEN and FARMER, JJ., concur.
715 So. 2d 1082 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1998) Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases
Topics
Indirect Criminal Contempt Final Order Departure From Essential Requirements Of Law Appeal

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Indirect Criminal Contempt cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
KLEIN, Judge.

KLEIN, Judge.

Joseph S. Shook, a lawyer representing a party in the trial court, seeks certiorari review of an order holding him in indirect civil contempt and assessing a fine of $10,000. Because this is a final order, so far as Shook is concerned, we conclude that review of this order should be by appeal, not by certiorari. The distinction is important because, on a petition for certiorari, the standard of review is that the petitioner must demonstrate a departure from the essential requirements of law, a heavier burden than an appellant must carry on an appeal. Pevsner v. Frederick, 656 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)(Farmer, J., specially concurring). We are publishing this order so that the Bar will know that, where a final order is entered against a non-party such as, for example, a lawyer or a witness, the appropriate method for review of that order is by final appeal.

We therefore redesignate the petition for writ of certiorari as a final appeal and accept the petition as the initial brief and the appendix as appellant’s record. Appellee’s brief and appendix, if an appendix is necessary, shall be served within twenty days.

POLEN and FARMER, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Price v. Hannahs, 954 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)
    …they are found in contempt). We review contempt orders against nonparties by appeal rather than certiorari. See Nussbaumer v. State, 882 So. 2d 1067, 1072 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (noting that a nonparty may appeal if cited for contempt); Shook v. Alter, 715 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (redesignating certio-rari petition as appeal for review of contempt order); compare Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.840(f) (requiring court to enter judgment of guilt for indirect criminal contempt), with Fla. RApp. P. 9.140(b)(1)(A) (allowin…
  • Hamilton Monteiro v. Monteiro, 55 So. 3d 686 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)
    …y in very few cases where common law certiorari will be the appropriate relief. Id. at 1098-99. Moreover, as the moving party, the petitioner has the burden to demonstrate the departure from the essential requirements of the law. See Shook v. Alter, 715 So. 2d 1082, 1083 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). The husband has not shown how the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law. The husband has not cited to any authority which requires that the trial court submit the minor children to cross-examinat…
  • Dep't of Child. & Families v. State Attorney (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)
    …e Sheriff’s Office constitutes a final appealable order. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.110 (addressing final order appeals); Price v. Hannahs, 954 So. 2d 97, 100 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (recognizing a nonparty’s right to appeal a contempt order); Shook v. Alter, 715 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (converting a certiorari petition seeking review of a contempt order to an appeal). And so, like in Shook, we redesignate the Department’s petition as a final appeal. We accept the petition and response as briefs and the appendic…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw