CHARLIE L. TAITE, APPELLANT,

v.

W. CLYDE BUSBEE, EDWIN L. WALKER AND C. BROCK, AS AND CONSTITUTING THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD OF ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA, PETER GINDL AND J. E. HALL, CHAIRMAN AND SUPERINTENDENT, RESPECTIVELY, OF THE BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF ESCAMBIA COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By

• Kramer A. Litvak v. Scylla Props., LLC, 946 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
  …Amendment). Precisely because they are already parties, mandatory class members’ intervention rights narrow the trial court’s discretion in deciding motions by which mandatory class members seek to intervene as named parties. See Kearney v. Saline, 208 So. 2d 650, 652 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968) (“As a general rule, the matter of allowing parties to intervene is discretionary after the entrance of a final decree, however, we are not here confronted with a ‘run of the mill’ case in which the final decree settled the…
• Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Prichard, 636 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
  …ch threatened Provident’s interests. Finally, Provident alleged that it did not know about the suit until after the final judgment was entered. If so, it would be a harsh rule to fail to consider its intervention motion. See e.g., Kearney v. Saline, 208 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968). Therefore, the motion should have been considered on its merits. The dispute in this case turns on the first step of the analysis, namely whether Provident had a sufficient interest to protect to support intervention. We think…
• Brynwood Condo., Inc. v. Harbour Club Villas Condo. Ass'n & Quayside Assocs., Ltd., 436 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
  …have been certified as a class action. Compare: Brown v. Wainwright, 392 So. 2d 1327 (Fla.1981); Wags Transportation System, Inc. v. City of Miami Beach, 88 So. 2d 751 (Fla.1956); State v. Purdy, 242 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Kearney v. Saline, 208 So. 2d 650 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968); Rule 1.220 Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Class actions are normally instituted in a trial court and not in an appellate court. Therefore, we find the appellant’s contention that it should recover herein on the basis that it…