STATE
v.
GOTTFRIED
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 Florida Third District Court of Appeal dismissed the State's petition for writ of certiorari for lack of jurisdiction because the State failed to demonstrate irreparable harm from the trial court's non-final order.
A petition for writ of certiorari must be dismissed when the petitioner fails to establish that a non-final order departs from the essential requirements of law and causes irreparable harm incapable of correction on post-judgment appeal.
[1] A party seeking a writ of certiorari must demonstrate that a challenged non-final order departs from the essential requirements of law, results in material injury for the…
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“For a writ of certiorari to issue, the petitioner must demonstrate that the challenged non-final order (1) departs from the essential requirements of law, (2) results in material injury for the remainder of the case, and (3) such injury is incapable of correction on post-judgment appeal.”
Statement of the legal standard for certiorari jurisdiction from Coffey-Garcia v. South Miami Hosp., Inc.
The State of Florida petitioned for a writ of certiorari challenging a non-final order issued by the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County in a case aga…
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 Postjudgment Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We dismiss the State’s petition for writ of certiorari for lack of jurisdiction. See Coffey-Garcia v. South Miami Hosp., Inc., 194 So. 3d 533, 536 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (observing: “For a writ of certiorari to issue, the petitioner must demonstrate that the challenged non-final order (1) departs from the essential requirements of law, (2) results in material injury for the remainder of the case, and (3) such injury is incapable of correction on post-judgment appeal. The last two elements are referred to as irreparable harm, the establishment of which is a condition precedent to invoking certiorari jurisdiction”) (citations omitted); Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. San Perdido Ass'n, Inc., 104 So. 3d 344, 353 (Fla. 2012) (noting that “this Court has never held that requiring a party to continue to defend a lawsuit is irreparable harm for the purposes of invoking the jurisdiction of an appellate court to issue a common law writ of certiorari. . . . [T]o establish the type of irreparable harm necessary in order to permit certiorari review, a party cannot simply claim that continuation of the lawsuit would . . . result in needless litigation costs. To hold otherwise would mean that review of every non-final order could be sought through a petition for writ of certiorari. Under such a ruling, appellate courts would be inundated with petitions to review non-final orders and trial court proceedings would be unduly interrupted”); State v. Lozano, 616 So. 2d 73, 75 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993) (noting: “Ordinarily, the time, trouble, and expense of an unnecessary trial are not considered ‘irreparable 2 injury’ for these purposes. The ‘irreparable injury’ test must be satisfied in a certiorari proceeding that arises from a criminal case, as well”) (citation omitted).
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. SAN Perdido Ass'n, Inc., 104 So. 3d 344 (Fla. 2012)
- State v. Lozano, 616 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Coffey-Garcia v. S. Miami Hosp., Inc., 194 So. 3d 533 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)