DAVIS
v.
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
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 nonfinal prejudgment civil contempt order entered in an ongoing proceeding is subject to certiorari review, and Davis's petition failed to establish a departure from the essential requirements of law.
[1] A nonfinal prejudgment civil contempt order entered in an ongoing proceeding is subject to review by petition for writ of certiorari rather than direct appeal.
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“a prejudgment civil contempt order entered in an ongoing proceeding is subject to certiorari review”
Court citing Menke v. Wendell to explain the proper standard for reviewing such orders
Davis appealed a civil contempt order issued by the trial court in an ongoing proceeding in Hillsborough County.…
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 Departure From Essential Requirements Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
JONATHAN G. DAVIS,
Appellant,
v.
HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida,
Appellee.
No. 2D2024-1827
January 16, 2026
Appeal from the County Court for Hillsborough County; Richard A. Weis, Judge.
Payton S. McCann and Michael R. DeFeudis of McCann Legal, P.A., Miami, for Appellant.
Kenneth C. Pope, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Tampa, for Appellee.
KHOUZAM, Judge.
We treat this direct appeal of a nonfinal prejudgment civil contempt order as a petition for writ of certiorari. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.040(c) ("If a party seeks an improper remedy, the cause must be treated as if the proper remedy had been sought; provided that it will not be the responsibility of the court to seek the proper remedy."); see, e.g., Menke
2
v. Wendell, 188 So. 3d 869, 871 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) ("[A] prejudgment civil contempt order entered in an ongoing proceeding is subject to certiorari review."). As the petition fails to establish a departure from the essential requirements of the law, we must deny it. See Menke, 188 So. 3d at 871. Denied.
BLACK and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
__________________________
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.