C. C.
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, THE GUARDIAN AD LITEM, AND JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES
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 petitioner seeking mandamus relief to compel a ruling on a pending matter must demonstrate that she has noticed the matter for hearing in the lower tribunal.
[1] To obtain mandamus relief compelling a ruling on a pending matter, a petitioner must demonstrate that the matter has been noticed for hearing in the lower tribunal.
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 intelligenceC.C. filed a petition for writ of mandamus against the Department of Children and Families, the Guardian ad Litem, and Jewish Family Services regardin…
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 Writ Of Mandamus cases and more on FLexlaw
September 25, 2018 PER CURIAM.
The petition for writ of mandamus is denied on the merits. See Clark v. Nichols M. N. P., 225 So. 3d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017) (holding that to be entitled to mandamus relief compelling a ruling on a pending matter, a petitioner must demonstrate that he has noticed the matter for hearing in the lower tribunal).
WOLF, KELSEY, and JAY, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________ C.C., pro se, Petitioner. Ward L. Metzger, Appellate Counsel, Children’s Legal Services, Jacksonville, for Respondent Department of Children and Families. No appearance for Guardian ad Litem or Jewish Family Services, Respondents.