ANTHONY R. MARTIN, PETITIONER,
v.
SHERIFF EDWARD BIELUCH, LAW FIRM OF SACHS, SAX AND KLEIN, ST. LUCIE COUNTY STATE ATTORNEY (RICK SEYMOUR, BRUCE COLTON), RESPONDENTS
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.
The law firm appealed a partial summary judgment in favor of the McAlpins, who were represented by the firm in a California lawsuit. The trial court found the McAlpins were not obligated to pay the firm, but the appellate court affirmed on some theories and reversed on others.
The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment for the McAlpins on the theories of account stated and open account, but reversed on the theories of oral contract, contract by estoppel, and quantum meruit.
O’Melveny & Myers represented Mor-Lite, Inc., and its individual defendants, including the McAlpins, in a California sexual harassment lawsuit. Mor-Li…
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 Evidentiary Issues cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus alleging that he is entitled to immediate release from confinement. Because petitioner alleges that he is represented by counsel in the trial court proceedings, we dismiss these proceedings. See Sload v. State, 782 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)(habeas petition could not be entertained where petitioner was being represented by counsel). Moreover, his petition is insufficient to show that he would be entitled to immediate release. See id. The petition alleges that the Department of Corrections sought to withdraw the violation of probation warrant pursuant to which he was confined. The warrant, however, was not withdrawn. Instead, a judgment of conviction and sentence has been entered on the probation violation, which has been appealed. In addition, petitioner makes many broad allegations of fraud and corruption in the proceedings below, but the documents attached do not support his contentions. Further, the allegations raise evidentiary issues which must be pursued in the trial court, if at all.
Dismissed.
WARNER, C.J, STONE and POLEN, JJ., concur.