WILLIAM A. ALLEN, PETITIONER,
v.
CITY OF MIAMI, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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 denied a petition for rehearing, clarifying that its prior dismissal of a petition for certiorari did not rule on the merits of the case, specifically the striking of a punitive damages claim against the City of Miami.
The dismissal of the petition for certiorari was not a determination on the merits of the case and does not establish the law of the case. It also does not approve the trial judge's action in striking the punitive damages claim.
“The petition for certiorari was dismissed for failure to demonstrate a departure by the trial judge from the essential requirements of the law sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under such original proceedings.”
Explains the basis for the initial dismissal of the petition for certiorari.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe petitioner sought review via certiorari of a trial court's order striking a claim for punitive damages against the City of Miami. This court previ…
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 Certiorari Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
Certiorari dismissed.
On Petition for Rehearing
It appears from the petition for rehearing filed by the petitioner, seeking review of this court’s prior order dismissing petitioner’s petition for certiorari, that there is some confusion in the trial court as to the effect to be given to our prior order of dismissal.
The petition for rehearing is denied, but neither the denial of this petition nor the dismissal of the original petition for cer-tiorari are to be considered as determinative of the question involved. Neither is the dismissal of the petition for certiorari to be considered as establishing the law of the case nor approving the actions of the trial judge in striking the claim for punitive damages against the respondent City. The petition for certiorari was dismissed for failure to demonstrate a departure by the trial judge from the essential requirements of the law sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under such original proceedings.
Petition for rehearing denied.
On Petition for Rehearing
It appears from the petition for rehearing filed by the petitioner, seeking review of this court’s prior order dismissing petitioner’s petition for certiorari, that there is some confusion in the trial court as to the effect to be given to our prior order of dismissal.
The petition for rehearing is denied, but neither the denial of this petition nor the dismissal of the original petition for certiorari are to be considered as determinative of the question involved. Neither is the dismissal of the petition for certiorari to be considered as establishing the law of the case nor approving the actions of the trial judge in striking the claim for punitive damages against the respondent City. The petition for certiorari was dismissed for failure to demonstrate a departure by the trial judge from the essential requirements of the law sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under such original proceedings.
Petition for rehearing denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Modine Mfg. Co. v. ABC Radiator, Inc., 367 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…on may well have been based upon a determination of the insufficiency of the motion or a determination that the interference with the trial court at the pleading stage was not warranted where there was a remedy by appeal. Cf. Allen v. City of Miami, 147 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962); and Schayer & Co. v. Board of County Commissioners, 188 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966). In any event, the Supreme Court of Florida has held in Beverly Beach Properties v. Nelson, 68 So. 2d 604, 608 (1953): ** “We may change ‘th…
-
Barker v. Barker, 909 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…submit to the taking of his deposition. . In so doing, we do not establish law of the case on whether the Respondents have standing or stated a cause of action. See Bevan v. Wanicka, 505 So. 2d 1116, 1117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Allen v. City of Miami, 147 So. 2d 566, 567 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962) (explaining that declining to issue a writ of certiorari for failure ió demonstrate a departure from the essential requirements of the law should not be considered as approving the ruling of the trial judge or establishing la…