GRANVILLE
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A petition for writ of mandamus must be dismissed as moot when the controversy ceases to exist and no relief can be made effective.
[1] A petition for writ of mandamus is properly dismissed as moot when the issues raised have ceased to exist or no circumstances permit the relief prayed for to be made effe…
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 intelligence“A case is 'moot' when it presents no actual controversy or when the issues have ceased to exist. A moot case generally will be dismissed.”
Court's statement of the controlling legal standard for mootness dismissals, citing Godwin v. State, 593 So. 2d 211, 212 (Fla. 1992)
Granville filed a petition for writ of mandamus against the State of Florida in the First District Court of Appeal. The specific facts underlying the …
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 Mootness Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
March 13, 2024 PER CURIAM.
The Court dismisses the petition for writ of mandamus as moot. See State ex rel. Davis v. Milledge, 88 So. 2d 909, 909 (Fla. 1956) (dismissing mandamus proceeding because question raised in petition became moot); see also Barrs v. Peacock, 61 So. 118, 118 (Fla. 1913) (explaining that a court may dismiss an appeal on its own motion if it appears that “under no circumstances can th[e] relief prayed be made effective”); Godwin v. State, 593 So. 2d 211, 212 (Fla. 1992) (“A case is ‘moot’ when it presents no actual controversy or when the issues have ceased to exist. A moot case generally will be dismissed.”).
LEWIS, B.L. THOMAS, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Montgomery v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 468 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…for the court to grant a party any effectual relief. 3 Fla.Jur.2d, Appellate Review, § 287, p. 337. Mootness can be raised by the appellate court on its own motion. DeHoff v. Imeson, 153 Fla. 553, 15 So. 2d 258 (1943); Barrs v. Peacock, 65 Fla. 12, 61 So. 118 (1913). The rule discouraging review of moot cases is derived from the requirement of the United States Constitution, Article III, under which the existence of judicial power depends upon the existence of a case or controversy. Liner v. Jafco, Inc.,…
-
Ervin v. Cap. Weekly Post, Inc., 97 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 1957)…to the people. The future administration of the election law by public officials requires the hearing of the merits of the appeal. See State ex rel. Railroad Com’rs v. Southern Tel. & Const. Co., 65 Fla. 67, 61 So. 119; Barrs v. Peacock, 65 Fla. 12, 61 So. 118; Pitt v. Belote, 108 Fla. 292, 146 So. 380; Joughin v. Parks, 107 Fla. 833, 143 So. 145, 147 So. 273. In the disposition of the cause we find there is no need to discuss or determine the constitutional questions asserted by the defendants who insis…
-
Dehoff v. Imeson, 153 Fla. 553 (Fla. 1943)…could be attained by reviewing the questions therein contained. DuBose, County Judge, et al., v. Meister, 92 Fla. 995, 110 So. 546. Under such circumstances the appeal may be dismissed of the court’s own motion. Barrs v. Peacock, et ah, 65 Fla. 12, 61 So. 118. Appeal dismissed at cost of appellant. It is so ordered. BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ„ concur.…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sallas v. State, 593 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 1992)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Jefferson Davis v. Milledge, 88 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 1956)