PHILIP GEVAS AND MONIQUE GEVAS, PETITIONERS,
v.
TED FERNANDEZ, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Adequate Remedy On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
SHEVIN, Judge.
The Gevases seek a writ of certiorari. We grant the petition as the order denying the motion to compel respondent’s deposition and discovery of documents departs from the essential requirements of law from which there is no adequate remedy on appeal. Medero v. Florida Power & Light Co., 658 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Beekie v. Morgan, 751 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
In this case, despite the court’s statement that it would readdress the discovery matters if the case was not tried as scheduled, and Fernandez’s counsel’s representation that the requested discovery would be provided expeditiously, the court refused to consider the motion to compel discovery, believing discovery had been foreclosed at a prior hearing. Because the discovery sought was material to the central issue in the case, Lifemark Hosp. of Fla., Inc. v. Hernandez, 748 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), certiorari is granted and the order under review is quashed.
On remand, the court is directed to compel compliance with the discovery requests as outlined in the petition and to allow a reasonable time for discovery prior to trial.
Certiorari granted; order quashed; and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bates v. State, 887 So. 2d 1214 (Fla. 2004)…002) (certifying the same question as in Bates); Mason v. State, 834 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (certifying the same question as in Bates); Jaworski v. State, 828 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (certifying conflict with Bates); Wallace v. State, 833 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (certifying conflict with Smith); McPhee v. State, 823 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (certifying conflict with Smith). Many cases raising the same issue remain pending in the several district courts of appeal awaiting our resoluti…
-
Kanisky Evans v. State, 843 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…as addressing the civil effects of the plea, not future recidivism.” Collier v. State, 796 So. 2d 629, 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). We recognize that the rule followed in this district differs from that followed in the Fourth District. Wallace v. State, 833 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).* Finally, the defendant is not entitled to a hearing on his claim in any event because, under the circumstances of this case, the claim is facially incredible. The plea bargain in this case was for an adjudication on the charge…
-
Torrance Jones v. State, 838 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…e Fourth District Court of Appeal has decided differently. See Jones v. State, 814 So. 2d 446 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Smith v. State, 784 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). As we did in McPhee v. State, 823 So. 2d 160 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), Wallace v. State, 833 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), and Cifuentes v. State, 816 So. 2d 804 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), we certify direct conflict with Smith. See also Bates v. State, 818 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)(conflict certified); Stansel v. State, 825 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 2d DCA 200…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Herman v. Herman, 751 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Medero v. Fla. Power & Light Co., 658 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)
- Lifemark Hosps. OF Fla., Inc. v. Inez Hernandez and Lenin Hernandez, 748 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)