SUNDALE, LTD., ETC., ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
WILLIAMS PAVING COMPANY, INC., RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Florida Rule Of Civil Procedure 1.440 cases and more on FLexlaw
RAMIREZ, J.
The petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari or prohibition challenging the trial court’s order dated August 2, 2005, setting the cause for trial on November 7, 2005. It seems clear that the case was not at issue until September 16, 2005, when the respondents filed their response to petitioner’s affirmative defenses. Thus, the order setting the cause for trial did not comply with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.440.
However, for the issuance of a writ of certiorari, more is required than a simple legal error. See Escobar v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 898 So. 2d 952, 954 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). The petitioner must demonstrate that it has no adequate remedy on final appeal. See McCreery v. Fernandez, 882 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Sundale has not even attempted to allege how an appeal cannot remedy this legal error. We therefore deny the issuance of a writ of certiorari or prohibition but caution that, while the respondent may prevail today, any recovery may be subject to reversal on appeal, a situation easily remedied if the matter is simply set in accordance with rule 1.440.
Petition denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Blair, 39 So. 3d 1190 (Fla. 2010)…st that petitioner willfully failed to appear. Pretrial detention may not be ordered based on a failure to appear unless the court finds that the failure to appear was willful. See Lee v. State, 956 So. 2d 1292 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Johnson v. Jenne, 913 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Winters v. Jenne, 765 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999). Further, the trial court improperly ordered pretrial detention without finding that “no conditions of release can reasonably protect the community from risk of physical harm…
-
Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…ut in a more recent certiorari case involving a departure from rule 1.440, the Third District declined to issue the writ, observing that the petitioner was required to demonstrate more than a simple legal error. Sundale, Ltd. v. Williams Paving Co., 913 So. 2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). Rather, the court wrote, the petitioner had to establish why it had no adequate remedy on appeal from a final judgment. The court observed that “[petitioner] has not even attempted to allege how an appeal cannot remedy this legal…
-
Resendes v. Ric L. Bradshaw, 935 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…second problem with the lower court’s pretrial detention ruling is that it did not “contain findings of fact and conclusions of law to support it.” Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.132(c)(2); § 907.041(4)(c), (i); Paul, 783 So. 2d at 1049 n. 11; Johnson v. Jenne, 913 So. 2d 740, 741 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Buhbut v. Bieluch, 835 So. 2d 1222 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). A vague, general reference to “information” and “court files” “received and reviewed” is insufficient compliance with the procedural and statutory requirement of speci…
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
- Johnson v. State, 898 So. 2d 952 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- McCREERY v. Nita Darlene Fernandez, 882 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)