INTERNATIONAL PAPER COMPANY, PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Remand For Reconsideration cases and more on FLexlaw
WELLS, J.
We have for review International Paper Co. v. State Department of Revenue, 863 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), which cited to Crescent Miami Center, LLC v. Department of Revenue, 857 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003), review granted, 870 So. 2d 821 (Fla.2004), a case that was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla.1981).
This Court recently quashed the Third District Court of Appeal’s decision in Crescent. See Crescent Miami Ctr., LLC v. Fla. Dep’t of Revenue, 903 So. 2d 913 (Fla.2005). Accordingly, and upon review of the parties’ responses to this Court’s order to show cause dated June 8, 2005, this Court has determined that it should accept jurisdiction in this case. It is ordered that the petition for review in this case is granted, the First District Court of Appeal’s decision in International Paper is quashed, and this matter is remanded for reconsideration in light of this Court’s decision in Crescent.
No motion for rehearing will be entertained by this Court.
It is so ordered.
PARIENTE, C.J., and ANSTEAD, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Ventura v. State, 2 So. 3d 194 (Fla. 2009)…ard to Ventura’s pro se all-writs petition would necessarily aid this tribunal in the "complete exercise of its jurisdiction" concerning this capital case. Art. V, § 3(b)(7), Fla. Const.; ’ see also art. V, § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.; Williams v. State, 913 So. 2d 541, 543 (Fla.2005) ("[T]he all writs provision [of article V, section 3(b)(7) ] does not constitute a separate source of original or appellate jurisdiction. Rather, it operates in furtherance of the Court’s ‘ultimate jurisdiction,' conferred elsewhere…
-
Barnett v. Antonacci, 122 So. 3d 400 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…la. Const. “[T]he all writs provision does not constitute a separate source of original or appellate jurisdiction but rather operates in furtherance of the Court’s ‘ultimate jurisdiction,’ conferred elsewhere in the constitution.” Williams v. State, 913 So. 2d 541, 543 (Fla.2005). Affirmed. MAY, J., and JOHNSON, LAURA, Associate Judge, concur. . See §§ 517.301 (l)(a)2. & 517.302(1), Fla. Stat. (2012). . See § 812.014(2)(b)l„ Fla. Stat. (2012). . At the time the Governor issued the executive order, Michae…
-
Sims v. State, 998 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 2008)…endant purported to invoke our "all writs” jurisdiction, the “all writs” provision of the Florida Constitution does not grant the Court jurisdiction to review cases. Instead, we must have an independent basis for jurisdiction. See Williams v. State, 913 So. 2d 541, 543 (Fla.2005); St. Paul Title Ins. Corp. v. Davis, 392 So. 2d 1304, 1305 (Fla.1980). The majority treats the notice as one seeking review based on express and direct conflict. This is an appropriate use of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.040…
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981)
- Crescent Miami Ctr., LLC v. Fla. Dep't OF Revenue, 903 So. 2d 913 (Fla. 2005)
- Crescent Miami Ctr., LLC v. Dep't of Revenue, 857 So. 2d 904 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)
- Int'l Paper Co. v. State, 863 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)