MICHAEL J. CELESTE, JR., ETC., PETITIONER,
v.
LINDSAY KERNS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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 granted review, quashed the decision below, and remanded for reconsideration in light of a prior ruling.
The First District Court of Appeal's decision was pending review in the Supreme Court when it became final. The Supreme Court had previously stayed pr…
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 Stay Of Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
We have for review Celeste v. Kerns, 990 So.2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), in which the First District Court of Appeal cited as authority its decision Lowry v. Central Leasing Management, Inc., 988 So.2d 1113 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), denying rehearing of 18 So.3d 550 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), quashed, Lowry v. Central Leasing Management, Inc., 3 So.3d 1189 (Fla., 2009). By the time the First District’s Celeste decision became final on denial of rehearing, its Lowry decision was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art. Y, § (3)(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State, 405 So.2d 418 (Fla.1981).
As we had done in Lownj, we stayed proceedings in this case pending our disposition of Murray v. Mariner Health, 994 So.2d 1051 (Fla.2008). When our decision in Murray became final, we issued an order directing respondents in the present case to show cause why we should not accept jurisdiction, summarily quash the decision being reviewed, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Murray. Upon consideration of respondents’ response and petitioner’s reply thereto, we have determined to so proceed.
We thus grant the petition for review in this case, quash the decision below, and remand for reconsideration upon application of our decision in Murray. Petitioner’s pending motion to lift stay is accordingly denied as moot.
It is so ordered.
QUINCE, C.J., and WELLS, PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, POLSTON, and LABARGA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981)
- Murray v. Mariner Health and ACE USA, 994 So. 2d 1051 (Fla. 2008)
- Lowry v. Cent. Leasing Mgmt., Inc., 988 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
- Michael J. Celeste, Jr. of Celeste & Assocs., P.A. v. Kerns, 990 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
- Lowry v. Cent. Leasing Mgmt., Inc., 18 So. 3d 550 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
- K.Q.S. v. State, 3 So. 3d 1189 (Fla. 2009)
- Lowry v. Cent. Leasing Mgmt., Inc., 3 So. 3d 1189 (Fla. 2009)