DAVID L. BROWN, APPELLANT,
v.
WARDEN JOHN DOE PERRINE, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Florida Rule Of Appellate Procedure 9.020(H) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Having considered the appellant’s responses to this Court’s orders of May 23, 2003, and June 16, 2003, as well as the appellee’s reply filed on June 6, 2003, the appeal is hereby dismissed as untimely. See Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.530(b). The appellant brought an original petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the appellee, in his official capacity, to perform a legal duty. Because the petition did not seek review of agency action, the civil rules of procedure, rather than the appellate rules of procedure were controlling. Cf. Newell v. Moore, 826 So. 2d 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Under these rules, the appellant’s motion for rehearing was not timely, therefore, it did not delay rendition of the order on appeal. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.020(h). All pending motions are denied as moot.
AFFIRMED.
BENTON, PADOVANO and BROWNING, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (29 total)
-
Huck v. State, 881 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…character evidence. See § 90.404(1), Fla. Stat. (2003). While certainly the admission of evidence and the determination of its probative value is judged on an abuse of discretion standard, we think it was error to admit the tape. See State v. Gerry, 855 So. 2d 157 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). The comment of the police officer to the effect that he did not trust Mr. Huck as far as he could throw him was likewise inadmissible. Two matters undercut the prejudicial nature of this comment, however. First, the court gave…
-
AT & T Wireless Servs., Inc. v. Castro, 896 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…a. 4th DCA 2002). Indeed, “[t]he right to call witnesses is one of the most important due process rights of a party and accordingly, the exclusion of the testimony of expert witnesses must be carefully considered and sparingly done.” State v. Gerry, 855 So. 2d 157, 161 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). The E/C believed the testimony was important to its theory that Claimant was malingering, and when it was excluded, the E/C was denied its right to present its case. The fact that another physician (with a different specia…
-
Geissler v. State, 90 So. 3d 941 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…, 536 So. 2d 202, 205 (Fla.1988); Weatherford v. State, 561 So. 2d 629, 634 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Of course, a nurse practitioner such as Ms. Nadkarni may testify to the physical findings observed on examination of a child victim. See State v. Gerry, 855 So. 2d 157, 160 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). It is also proper for such a nurse practitioner to explain why, given the nature of the abuse alleged, physical injury may not be observed on examination. Id. Even if the expert does not comment directly on the child victi…
Previewing 3 of 29 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Newell v. Moore, 826 So. 2d 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)