PATRICIA WADE AND THE FRIENDS OF REDLAND, INC., APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS,
v.
MIAMI DADE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, APPELLEE/RESPONDENT

Fla. 3d DCA | 2006-03-08
No. 3D05-1192
Before SHEPHERD, SUAREZ and ROTHENBERG, JJ.
922 So. 2d 402 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Pino v. District Ct. of App., Third Dist., 604 So. 2d 1232, 1233 (Fla.1992)(mandamus is not appropriate where the petitioner has other legal methods for obtaining relief); Williams v. Schulman, 721 So. 2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)(petitioner not entitled to mandamus where an adequate remedy at law was available); Miami-Dade County v. Palmetto Bay, 744 So. 2d 1076, 1077 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)(whether to “move forward towards authorizing incorporation” is a “discretionary political decision”).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Titus Laqual Henley v. State, 201 So. 3d 648 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)
    …se this issue on direct appeal or in his several post-conviction motions. Mandamus is not an appropriate remedy in the instant cases, because the trial court has not failed in the performance of a legal duty. Wade v. Miami Dade Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, 922 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (Mem); Jacobs v. State, 827 So. 2d 294, 294 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (Mem) (“[Mjandamus is not the proper vehicle to address errors in a criminal case where a direct appeal and post-conviction motions provide adequate remedies.”). The…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw