MICHAEL J. LASSITER, PETITIONER,
v.
JAMES D. MARTIN, PUBLIC RECORDS CUSTODIAN, RESPONDENT

Fla. 1st DCA | 2012-10-31
No. 1D12-3233
BENTON, C.J., THOMAS and ROWE, JJ., concur.
99 So. 3d 1000 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2012) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Michael J. Lassiter petitions the court for mandamus relief in the form of an order compelling the circuit court to dispose of his pending complaint for writ of mandamus. In that complaint, Lassiter seeks to compel respondent, an employee of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, to comply with his public records requests. We conclude based on the circuit court’s recent issuance of an order to show cause and the subsequent filings by the parties that the granting of mandamus relief is unwarranted at this point. See Munn v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 807 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). We note, however, that petitioner’s complaint is entitled to accelerated consideration and case priority over other pending cases in accordance with section 119.11(1), Florida Statutes (2012). Accordingly, we deny the pe*1001tition for writ of mandamus, with direction that the petitioner’s case be expedited.

BENTON, C.J., THOMAS and ROWE, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Vance v. State, 152 So. 3d 110 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
    …nce’s petition below, and we conclude that under the unusual circumstances of this case, intervention by this court is unwarranted at this point. See Munn v. Florida Parole Commission, 807 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); see also Lassiter v. Martin, 99 So. 3d 1000 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). The circuit court itself recognized in its order to show cause that Vance is entitled to a prompt disposition of his claim. However, it appears that the cause for any delay in fulfilling Vance’s request for records is not due to…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw