Hawaiian Inn of Daytona Beach Inc. v. Snead Const. Corp., 80-1319
Decision Date | 18 February 1981 |
Docket Number | No. 80-1319,80-1319 |
Citation | 393 So.2d 1201 |
Parties | The HAWAIIAN INN OF DAYTONA BEACH INC., a Florida Corporation, Petitioner, v. SNEAD CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, a Florida Corporation et al., Respondents. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bedell, Bedell, Dittmar & Zehmer, Jacksonville, for petitioner.
Kinsey, Vincent, Pyle, Williams & Tumbleson, Daytona Beach, for respondent Snead Construction Corporation.
Horton, Perse & Ginsberg and Welbaum, Zook & Jones, P. A., Miami, for respondent American Employers' Insurance Company.
This is a petition for a writ of common law certiorari to "reverse" an interlocutory order of the trial court denying petitioner's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. The petitioner argues extensively that the trial court should permit the desired leave to amend under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.190(a) and case law. Petitioner may be correct in its arguments but that is not the point here.
Common law certiorari is a remedy when the lower court is acting without jurisdiction or its order will itself constitute or permit irreparable injury or such order constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law. 1 Even in those cases, the reviewing court, traditionally and correctly, can only quash the offending order and cannot direct action in the trial court. The existence of some other present and adequate remedy, such as appeal, may prevent injury from being legally irreparable and thereby preclude common law certiorari but this does not mean that certiorari is available merely because no immediate remedy by appeal from a non-final order is available. An appeal after judgment is an adequate remedy for an ordinary reversible error for which no appeal is provided in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3), which lists several types of non-final orders reviewable by appeal. Orders denying leave to amend are not included.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Tucker v. Resha
...not reviewable under Rule 9.130, is subject to review "only in limited circumstances." See Savage; Hawaiian Inn of Daytona Beach, Inc. v. Snead Constr. Co., 393 So.2d 1201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (fact that no immediate remedy by appeal from non-final order was available did not of itself indic......
-
Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage
...the interlocutory appeal rule which authorizes appeal from only a few types of non-final orders. 2 Hawaiian Inn v. Snead Construction Corp., 393 So.2d 1201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Ford Motor Co. v. Edwards, 363 So.2d 867 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Generally, all other appellate review is postponed u......
-
Paine, Webber, Jackson & Curtis, Inc. v. Lucas
...Church of Live Oak, Inc., 396 So.2d 281 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).1 Fla.R.App.P. 9.130; see, e.g., Hawaiian Inn of Daytona Beach, Inc. v. Snead Construction Corp., 393 So.2d 1201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (order denying motion for leave to file second amended complaint); Bowl America Florida, Inc. v. S......
-
J. S., In Interest of, 81-1022
...of the law;(b) resulting in material harm;(c) for which remedy by appeal would be inadequate.Hawaiian Inn of Daytona Beach, Inc. v. Snead Construction Corp., 393 So.2d 1201 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Schonfeld v. Hughes Supply, Inc., 392 So.2d 324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Briggs v. Salcines, 392 So.2......