TRACEY HAMMONS
v.
HILL-ROM COMPANY, INC., A FOREIGN CORPORATION, AND SOUTHERN BAPTIST HOSPITAL OF FLORIDA, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, D/B/A BAPTIST MEDICAL CENTER DOWNTOWN
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 must be dismissed when the petitioner fails to establish irreparable harm, particularly where the trial court has provided an available remedy.
[1] A petition for writ of certiorari lacks jurisdiction when the petitioner fails to establish irreparable harm, even where the trial court has denied a requested relief, if…
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“where the threshold requirement of irreparable harm is not established, the petition for writ of certiorari must be dismissed”
Court's citation to Landmark at Crescent Ridge LP v. Everest Financial, Inc., explaining the jurisdictional requirement for certiorari review
Petitioner, proceeding pro se, sought a continuance of trial scheduled for April 11, 2022, to secure new counsel. The trial court denied the continuan…
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 Continuance Of Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to review the trial court’s denial of a continuance of trial and other pretrial matters. Petitioner, who is currently proceeding pro se in the trial court, seeks a continuance so she may secure new counsel. The record reflects, however, that the trial court has afforded Petitioner the opportunity to renew her motion to continue by identifying an attorney who would take her case but for the April 11, 2022, trial date. In that event, the trial court could assess the attorney’s
intentions to take the case and re-evaluate the need for a continuance. In light of this available remedy, the Court finds that Petitioner has not shown irreparable harm. We dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. See Landmark at Crescent Ridge LP v. Everest Financial, Inc., 219 So. 3d 218, 219 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (explaining that where the threshold requirement of irreparable harm is not established, the petition for writ of certiorari must be dismissed). LEWIS, KELSEY, and NORDBY, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Landmark AT Crescent Ridge LP v. Everest Fin., Inc., 219 So. 3d 218 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)