FLAGLER FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF MIAMI, CHARTERED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES, PETITIONER,
v.
G. S. WHITING, SOLE PROPRIETOR, RESPONDENT; FLAGLER FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF MIAMI, PETITIONER, V. HARRIS STANDARD PAINT COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, RESPONDENT
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.
Flagler Federal Savings and Loan Association petitioned for writs of certiorari to overturn an interlocutory order denying its motion to consolidate two related civil actions. The court held that certiorari is inappropriate for reviewing interlocutory orders in actions at law absent exceptional circumstances, and denied both petitions.
The court held that certiorari is ordinarily not the proper vehicle to review interlocutory orders in actions at law because such orders may be corrected through appeal, and certiorari is only available in exceptional cases where the lower court acts without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction, or where the interlocutory order does not conform to essential requirements of law and may cause material injury for which appeal would be an inadequate remedy.
“The common-law writ of certi-orari is a discretionary writ and ordinarily will not be allowed by an appellate court to review an order in an action at law.”
Establishes the general rule that certiorari is not the proper remedy for interlocutory orders in civil cases at law.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFlagler Federal Savings and Loan Association was defendant in one action brought by G. S. Whiting and plaintiff in another action against Harris Stand…
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 Common Law Writ Of Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
Two causes, consolidated for purposes of the briefs and oral argument, have been brought before this court via the avenue of petitions for “common-law” writs of certiorari. The petitioner was the defendant in the first action, case no. 3622 in this court, G. S. Whiting v. Flagler Federal Savings and Loan Association of Miami, while in the second action, case no. 3623 here, Flagler Federal Savings and Loan Association of Miami v. Harris Standard Paint Company, petitioner was plaintiff. In each instance, the petitioner seeks to have reviewed and quashed an order of the circuit court for Broward County, Florida, rendered September 25, 1962, the substance and the effect of which is to deny a motion of petitioner, Flagler Federal Savings and Loan Association of Miami, seeking to consolidate for trial the cases above mentioned. Without dispute, these cases are actions at law, and the order sought to be upset is an interlocutory one. The parties in the two suits are not wholly identical. Under the pleadings, certain theories set up in the second suit are materially different from any in the first suit. Because of this, the nature of the proof required under the second suit would also be different and could require different jury instructions.
The common-law writ of certi-orari is a discretionary writ and ordinarily will not be allowed by an appellate court to review an order in an action at law. This is so, because such an order may be corrected through the method of appeal. PIow-eVer, it is only in exceptional cases, such as those where the lower court acts without or in excess of its jurisdiction, or where an interlocutory order does not conform to essential requirements of law and may reasonably cause material injury throughout the subsequent proceedings for which the remedy by appeal will be inadequate, that an appellate court will exercise discretionary power to issue such writ. See Kauffman v. King, Fla.1956, 89 So.2d 24.
We fail to find that the remedy of certiorari should be employed to assault the interlocutory order. Consequently, each petition is denied.
ALLEN, Acting C. J., and KANNER and SMITH, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wright v. Sterling Drugs, Inc., 287 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)…ments of law and may reasonably cause material injury throughout the subsequent proceedings for which the remedy by appeal would be inadequate. Kauffman v. King, Fla.1956, 89 So. 2d 24; Flagler Federl Savings and Loan Ass’n v. Whiting, Fla.App.1963, 148 So. 2d 555. The incurring of the expense of a trial on the merits has been held not to constitute material or irreparable injury. R. J. Brown, Inc. v. Seminerio, Fla.App.1971, 246 So. 2d 629. Were it not so, many interlocutory orders entered in cases formerly…
-
Shearson v. Vouis, 247 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…tory appeal is not available to review the lower court order in a common law action, we dismiss the interlocutory appeal. Noble v. McNeal, Fla.App.1965, 179 So. 2d 126; Flagler Federal Savings and Loan Association of Miami v. Whiting, Fla.App. 1963, 148 So. 2d 555. However, all the matters sought to be reviewed in both proceedings will be considered upon the petition for certiorari. Respondent George Vouis filed a complaint on June 26, 1970, against the defendants, alleging misrepresentation, fraud, and brea…
-
Freedman v. Amdur, 160 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)…wer certain oral interrogatories. This petition is addressed to the discretion of this court [see: Easley v. The Garden Sanctuary, Inc., Fla.App.1960, 120 So. 2d 59, 78 A.L.R.2d 1199; Flagler Federal Savings and Loan Ass’n. v. Whiting, Fla.App.1963, 148 So. 2d 555] and, following a review of it and the supporting brief and transcript, the court declines to entertain the petition and dismisses same, without prejudice to the petitioner [upon appropriate final appellate proceedings] seeking a review of the order…
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
- Kauffman v. Annabel King, 89 So. 2d 24 (Fla. 1956)