STATE OF FLORIDA EX REL. MARILYN RANDALL, APPELLANT,
v.
HONORABLE DAVID J. HEFFERNAN, JUDGE, CIVIL COURT OF RECORD IN AND FOR DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
Appellant sought mandamus to compel a civil court judge to set aside an order vacating a final judgment in her favor. The District Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of the mandamus petition, holding that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to review civil court of record actions following the 1957 Florida constitutional revision.
The circuit court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the mandamus petition directed at the civil court of record judge's actions. Following the 1957 constitutional revision, jurisdiction to review civil court of record judgments and actions was vested exclusively in the district courts of appeal, and the circuit court's supervisory jurisdiction over the civil court of record was withdrawn.
“Since the revision of Article V of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., which became effective July 1, 1957, the judgments and actions of the civil court of record became reviewable only in the district courts of appeal.”
Establishes the jurisdictional shift that is central to the holding—circuit courts no longer review civil court of record actions.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant filed a petition for writ of mandamus in circuit court seeking to require a judge of the civil court of record to set aside an order vacatin…
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 Jurisdiction Of District Courts Of Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant seeks the reversal of a final order dismissing her petition for a writ of mandamus, whereby she sought to require a judge of the civil court of record to set aside an order vacating a final judgment previously entered in her favor.
We pretermit the consideration of the merits of this appeal because of a serious jurisdictional defect apparent on the face of the record. Since the revision of Article V of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., which became effective July 1, 1957, the judgments and actions of the civil court of record became reviewable only in the district courts of appeal. See Rosenblum v. Boss, Fla.App.1958, 101 So.2d 596. The constitutional support for the statutory jurisdiction of the circuit court to review judgments of the civil court of record was withdrawn by the revision of Article V; consequently, any supervisory jurisdiction theretofore vested in and exercised by the circuit courts was likewise withdrawn. Section 6(3), Article V, of the Constitution of Florida, effective July 1, 1957, provides in part the jurisdiction of the circuit courts as follows:
“* * *. They shall have final appellate jurisdiction in all civil and criminal cases arising in% the county court, or before county judges’ courts, of all misdemeanors tried in criminal courts of record, and of all cases arising in municipal courts, small claims courts, and courts of justices of the peace. The circuit courts and judges shall have power to issue writs of mandamus, * * * and all writs necessary or proper to the complete exercise of their jurisdiction.”
Since the circuit court is now without jurisdiction to review the judgments and actions of the civil court of record, it follows that it was without jurisdiction to entertain a petition for mandamus directed to that court. Further, lacking jurisdiction to review the actions of the civil court of record, the issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other writ could not have been in furtherance of or necessary or proper to the complete exercise of its appellate jurisdiction.
Concluding as we have that the circuit court was without jurisdiction to entertain the petition for mandamus directed to an action of a judge of the civil court of record, it follows that the order of the circuit judge dismissing the writ of mandamus should be and it is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State of Fla. ex rel. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n v. Honorable Allen C. Anderson, 164 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)…ceedings initiated to prohibit an agency of the state from exercising its lawfully delegated judicial powers, where the circuit court „ does not have appellate jurisdiction over such agency. Accord: State ex rel. Randall v. Heffernan, Fla.App. 1961, 128 So. 2d 892. Article V, § 5(3), Constitution of Florida, provides that “The district courts of appeal shall have such powers of direct review of administrative action as may be provided by law.” Pursuant to the quoted provision, the Legislature has conferred u…
-
Newman v. Hornsby, 385 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…annot be waived. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.140; see Seaboard Air Line Co. v. Gay, 68 So. 2d 591, 592 (Fla.1953); Corbett v. McDonald, 206 So. 2d 407 (Fla.4th DCA 1968); State v. Anderson, 164 So. 2d 265 (Fla.2d DCA 1964); State v. Heffernan, 128 So. 2d 892 (Fla.3d DCA 1961). We have not overlooked the Florida case of State ex. rel. Wainwright v. Holley, supra, which suggests by way of dicta that Section 79.09 is only a venue statute. However, the issue in that case was not venue versus jurisdiction a…
-
Amos W. Corbett v. Parker Lee McDONALD, 206 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)…. The circuit court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the original petition for writ of mandamus in that such court does not have appellate jurisdiction over the Florida Real Estate Commission. State ex rel. Randall v. Heffernan, Fla. App.1961, 128 So. 2d 892; State ex rel. [Florida] Real Estate Commission v. Anderson, Fla.App.1964, 164 So. 2d 265. 2. Assuming jurisdiction in the circuit court, petitioner has an adequate remedy by appeal. Crump v. Branning, 1917, 74 Fla. 522, 77 So. 228; Welch v. State…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Naster v. Universal DIE Casting Corp., 101 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)