MICHAEL LONGMEIER, PETITIONER,
v.
PAMELA LONGMEIER, 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.
The court denied a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to enforce child visitation provisions, holding that the petitioner had either waived his right to appeal or would have an adequate legal remedy through future appeal of a final order.
A writ of mandamus is not available when the petitioner either waived his right to appeal an interlocutory order or will have an adequate legal remedy through appeal of a final order.
[1] A writ of mandamus is not available when the petitioner has an adequate legal remedy through appeal of a final order or has waived the right to appeal an interlocutory or…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court issued an order on November 9, 2004, allowing the child to select counseling over visits with his father, and deferred other claims fo…
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 Child Visitation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Michael Longmeier petitions this court to issue a writ of mandamus. According to petitioner, the trial court is refusing to enforce the child visitation provisions of a judgment of dissolution of marriage which has not been modified.
The circuit court issued an order on November 9, 2004, which allowed the child to select counseling over visits with petitioner, his father. Other claims for relief by the father were deferred to a later date. A party seeking a writ of mandamus must show that no other legal remedy exists. Park v. Dugger, 548 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989); Hall v. Key, 476 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). If the November 9 order was appealable, Longmeier waived his right to relief by failing to appeal it. If it was not appealable because of reservation of jurisdiction by the trial court over certain issues (and we find it unnecessary to resolve the appealability of the November 9 order at this time), then petitioner will have an adequate legal remedy when an appealable order is rendered and he appeals it. We do not treat the instant petition as seeking rendition by the trial court of an appealable order because there is no showing by petitioner that a distinct demand was made to the trial court for issuance of such an order. See Medberry v. Circuit Court for Brevard County, 762 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).
PETITION DENIED.
WEBSTER, PADOVANO and HAWKES, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Odell Hall v. KEY, 476 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Medberry v. Cir. Court FOR Brevard Cnty., 762 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)
- Mickey A. Park v. Dugger, 548 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)