Dairyland Ins. Co. v. McKenzie, P--269
| Citation | 251 So.2d 887 |
| Decision Date | 02 September 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. P--269,P--269 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | DAIRYLAND INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Ruby McKENZIE et al., Respondents. |
Truett & Watkins, Tallahassee, for petitioner.
M. Howard Williams, Tallahassee, for respondents.
Petitioner seeks review by common law certiorari of an interlocutory order rendered in a law action in which respondent McKenzie seeks a judgment for damages resulting from the alleged negligent operation of a motor vehicle by respondent Mary L. Willis. The order challenged by this proceeding found that petitioner, Dairyland Insurance Company, a named defendant in the suit, was legally bound to afford coverage to its insureds, Mary L. and Carlton O'Neal Willis, under the provisions of the nonowners automobile liability insurance policy issued by it to the Willises prior to the accident.
It is an established principle of law in this jurisdiction that common law certiorari is not a permissible vehicle for seeking review of an interlocutory order rendered in a law action unless it is clearly established that (1) the ruling, if erroneous, constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law; and (2) it will cause material injury to the petitioner throughout the remainder of the proceedings; and (3) the injury is one for which there will be no adequate remedy by appeal after final judgment. 1
From the record before us it appears that no judgment has yet been rendered against either petitioner or its insureds, the Willises. Until such event occurs, no injury will be suffered by petitioner. If such contingency does eventuate, petitioner will then have an adequate and complete remedy by appeal for correcting the trial court's erroneous ruling if such ruling constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law as contended. For the foregoing reasons, certiorari is denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Conner v. Mid-Florida Growers, Inc.
...method of review because no irreparable injury has occurred that would not be remediable by plenary appeal. Dairyland Insurance Co. v. McKenzie, 251 So.2d 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). In the present case, however, we have determined that the "writ of mandamus" represents an end to judicial labo......
-
Canal Ins. Co. v. Reed
...court. Bruns, 443 So.2d at 961. Denial of certiorari is also consistent with prior decisions of this court. See Dairyland Ins. Co. v. McKenzie, 251 So.2d 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971) (denied certiorari review of interlocutory order finding petitioner, a named defendant in damages suit, legally b......
-
Bowl America Florida, Inc. v. Schmidt, 79-439
...in their attempts to secure this writ of common law certiorari and have narrowly applied the test from Dairyland Insurance Co. v. McKenzie, 251 So.2d 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971), to determine whether the writ should be granted. Cases state that a liberal application of that test would increase ......
-
Hawaiian Inn of Daytona Beach Inc. v. Snead Const. Corp., 80-1319
...only a few non-final orders. 3 The petition for certiorari is DENIED. COBB and SHARP, JJ., concur. 1 See Dairyland Insurance Company v. McKenzie, 251 So.2d 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971).2 See Bowl America Florida, Inc. v. Schmidt, 386 So.2d 1203 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Professional Medical Specialti......