FABIAN BANDY, APPELLANT,
v.
FRANK SHEFFIELD, APPELLEE
FABIAN BANDY, APPELLANT,
FRANK SHEFFIELD, APPELLEE
751 So. 2d 164
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2000)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The lower court should not have dismissed the appellant’s mandamus petition without clarifying what additional filings were needed to comport with the case management order, and without then giving the appellant a reasonable amount of time within which to comply. See Gonzalez v. Moore, 743 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). The appealed order is therefore reversed and the case is remanded.
ALLEN, WEBSTER and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ondina Williams v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 801 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…ly and succinctly held, it is an abuse of discretion to dismiss a petition for failing to comply with the requirements of section 57.085 without first affording to the party an opportunity to correct the deficiencies.”); see also Bandy v. Sheffield, 751 So. 2d 164, 164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Masiello v. Moore, 739 So. 2d 1196, 1196 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Marquart v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 701 So. 2d 674, 675 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). ALLEN, C.J., BOOTH and BENTON, JJ., Concur.…
-
Vanderberg v. Moore, 765 So. 2d 94 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)…AM. The trial court should not have dismissed appellant’s petition for writ of mandamus without specifying which documents appellant failed to supply in his previous filings under section 57.085(7), Florida Statutes (1997). See Bandy v. Sheffield, 751 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Gosman v. Moore, 745 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. ERVIN, VAN NORTWICK and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.…
Authorities Cited
- Gonzalez v. Moore, 743 So. 2d 158 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)