FRANCIS E. WRIGHT, PETITIONER,
v.
STERLING DRUGS, INC., ETC., 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.
A petition for writ of certiorari is not the proper vehicle to review an order setting aside a final judgment entered after default, as such an order is reviewable by interlocutory appeal.
Petitioner sought review by writ of certiorari of an order setting aside a final judgment entered after default. The lower court's order was reviewabl…
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 Material Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIMES, Judge.
This is a Petition for Writ of Certiorari seeking review of an order setting aside a final judgment entered after default.
Common law certiorari lies 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 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 cognizable at law would be subject to review by certiorari. This would result in an unseemly intrusion into the progress of the case in the trial court.
While the order vacating the final judgment and default could have been reviewed by interlocutory appeal,1 this court is powerless to consider a petition for writ of certiorari as an appeal. See Norman v. Pinellas County, Fla.App.1971, 250 So. 2d 279.
The petition for writ of certiorari is denied without prejudice to the right of petitioner to seek review of the matters contained therein by way of appeal from the final judgment.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON, W. CLAYTON, Associate Judge, concur. . Bland v. Mitchell, Fla.1970, 245 So. 2d 47.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (28 total)
-
Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So. 2d 1097 (Fla. 1987)…non-issue will always be inconvenient and entail considerable expense of time and money for all parties in the case. The authorities are clear that this type of harm is not sufficient to permit certiorari review. See Wright v. Sterling Drugs, Inc., 287 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973), cert. denied, 296 So. 2d 51 (1974). Moreover, if we permitted review at this stage, appellate courts would be inundated by petitions to review orders denying motions to dismiss such claims, and trial court proceedings would be un…
-
Leslie Pearlstein, M.D. v. Malunney, 500 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…rrant our issuance of a writ of certiorari. Whiteside v. Johnson, 351 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). This rule of law, however, generally comes into play where the error complained of can be remedied by direct appeal. Wright v. Sterling Drugs, Inc., 287 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973). As we have said, relief by direct appeal would be no relief at all in this case. Moreover, there is precedent for our early intervention where a departure from the essential requirements of law is found to exist and numerous simi…
-
Santini Bros., Inc. v. Grover, 338 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)…er does not conform to the essential requirements of law and to proceed without immediate review may reasonably cause material injury throughout the subsequent proceedings for which the remedy by appeal is inadequate. Wright v. Sterling Drugs, Inc., 287 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 3 DCA 1973); Pullman Company v. Fleishel, 101 So. 2d 188 (Fla. 1 DCA 1958). And it has long since been decided that [*80] having to experience the rigors and expense of a trial are not such material injury which cannot be remedied by plenary a…
Previewing 3 of 28 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)
- Bland v. Mitchell, 245 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 1970)
- R. J. Brown, Inc. v. Seminerio, 246 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- Norman v. Pinellas Cnty., 250 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)
- Flagler Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Miami v. Whiting, 148 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)