OSECHAS
v.
CORREA ARCILA
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.
Andres Sultan Osechas petitioned for a writ of certiorari challenging a circuit court order by Judge Jose M. Rodriguez in a Miami-Dade County case. The Third District Court of Appeal denied the petition, though Justice Scales specially concurred to criticize the limitations of certiorari review for orders granting leave to amend complaints to add punitive damages.
The petition for writ of certiorari is denied. The court affirmed the circuit court's order without detailed explanation, though Justice Scales indicated the denial resulted from the stringent requirements of certiorari review.
[1] An interlocutory order granting leave to amend a complaint to add punitive damages is reviewable only by writ of certiorari, not by direct appeal, and therefore petitione…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe opinion does not disclose the underlying factual circumstances of the case. The record reflects only that a circuit court issued an order at issue…
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 Interlocutory Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed February 6, 2019. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D18-1897 Lower Tribunal No. 17-8390 ________________ Andres Sultan Osechas, Petitioner, vs. Sarah Correa Arcila, Respondent. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose M. Rodriguez, Judge. Wicker Smith O'Hara McCoy & Ford, P.A. and Alyssa M. Reiter and Brandon J. Hechtman (Fort Lauderdale), for petitioner. Michael T. Flanagan; James C. Blecke, for respondent. Before SALTER, FERNANDEZ and SCALES, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Petition denied.
Andres Sultan Osechas v. Sarah Correa Arcila Case No. 3D18-1897 SCALES, J. specially concurring.
I concur in the denial of the petition because the limitations of our review – i.e., the exacting certiorari standard – require this result. At the risk, though, of sounding like a broken record,1 I again encourage the Florida Bar’s Appellate Rules Committee to consider adding to the schedule of non-final appealable orders found in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3) those orders granting leave to amend a complaint to add punitive damages. Given how such interlocutory orders materially alter the course of civil litigation, I fail to see how the certiorari standard is more appropriate than an appellate standard. TRG Desert Inn Venture, Ltd. v. Berezovsky, 194 So. 3d 516, 520 n.5 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); Levin v Pritchard, No. 3D17-2711 *2 n.4 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 31, 2018).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Event Depot Corp. v. Frank, 269 So. 3d 559 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)
-
Sedgwick Claims Mgmt. Servs., Inc. v. Alana Rodriguez (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)
-
Walker v. Alana Rodriguez (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)
Authorities Cited
- TRG Desert INN Venture, Ltd. v. Berezovsky, 194 So. 3d 516 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
- Levin v. Pritchard, 258 So. 3d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)