SOLITRON DEVICES, INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION AUTHORIZED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
GEORGE W. REILAND, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rules Of Appellate Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
DOWNEY, Judge.
We have for consideration a petition for writ of certiorari directed to an order of the trial court denying petitioner’s motion to dismiss respondent’s complaint in an action formerly cognizable at law.
As we pointed out in a recent decision, Siegel v. Abramowitz et al., 309 So. 2d 234, (Opinion filed March 14, 1975), the fact that it would be expedient from the standpoint of one or both of the parties to have the propriety of interlocutory orders in actions formerly cognizable at law determined by writ of certiorari is not sufficient to warrant granting that writ. There seems to be a trend afoot to seek review of all interlocutory orders in “law cases” as is available in “equity cases.” But as of this writing there is no such provision in the appellate rules. See Pullman Company v. Fleishel, Fla.App.1958, 101 So. 2d 188.
If petitioner is still aggrieved over the ruling in question, adequate review will be available by appeal.
Accordingly, the petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
WALDEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Santini Bros., Inc. v. Grover, 338 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)…in question was erroneous it would constitute a departure from the essential requirements of law. This court has on numerous occasions refused to grant certiorari to review such orders. Siegel v. Abramowitz, supra; Solitron Devices, Inc. v. Reiland, 311 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). But in Stuart v. Hertz Corporation, 302 So. 2d 187 (Fla. DCA 1974), following Beta Eta House, supra, this court granted certiorari to review an order denying a motion to dismiss a third party complaint in an action formerly cogn…
-
Lindsey v. Sherman, 402 So. 2d 1349 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…ure from the essential requirements of law, such error can be rectified by plenary appeal pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110. See, e. g., Siegel v. Abramowitz, 309 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Solitron Devices, Inc. v. Reiland, 311 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Santini Brothers, Inc. v. Grover, 338 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Federal Insurance Company v. Guterma, 379 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. DOWNEY, MOORE and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur…
-
Johnson v. Henningson, 370 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…. 2d 58, Fourth District Court of Appeal Case No. 78—2715, Opinion filed April 18,1979; Santini Brothers, Inc. v. Grover, 338 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); Siegel v. Abramowitz, 309 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Solitron Devices, Inc. v. Reiland, 311 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). See also: Esler v. Gabinet, 369 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). CERTIORARI DENIED. DOWNEY, C. J., and ANSTEAD and DAUKSCH, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Humphrey v. Seminole Cnty. Court, 309 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- The Pullman Co. v. Fleishel, 101 So. 2d 188 (Fla. 1st DCA 1958)